Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We Can

Gathered together in one place, for easy access, an agglomeration of writings and images relevant to the Rapeutation phenomenon.

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:40 am

CHAPTER 14: Teaching the New Generation to Think: Human and Computer Models at School and at Home

CAN WE TEACH CHILDREN TO THINK?


"Teaching thinking skills," another "movement" currently passing through the educational system, is a response to a growing concern that Johnny can't think any better than he can read. Programs attempting to teach thinking skills are selling like hotcakes at teachers' conferences and workshops. Yet critics scornfully point out it is a contradiction in terms to rely on packets, workbooks, computer drills, and worksheets to engage students' higher cognitive abilities. On this question lies the crux of the argument: Are so-called "thinking skills" best taught by setting aside a special time for mental calisthenics and then hoping they will transfer to other sorts of learning? Or are "thinking skills" better served by teaching all subjects in ways that draw students toward higher-level reasoning by the nature of the materials and the problems presented? The most generally prevailing opinion (aside from the purveyors of "thinking skills" programs) is that persistence and flexibility in problem-solving should be incorporated into overall teaching goals, modeled and supported in every discipline -- provided, of course, that the teacher's own thinking skills are up to the task. Some educators also have hopes for computer programs that expand and may be able to challenge reasoning skills.

"Critical thinking," a primary goal of all such programs, is hard to pin down. How can it be measured? How does it develop? "Slickly packaged materials do not necessarily create good critical thinkers," says Dr. Marilyn Wilson of Michigan State University in a recent article that also raises several important questions. Is critical thinking out of place in a traditionally structured classroom? Is society ready for critically thinking students? [1]

Many educators have trouble with the idea of upsetting traditional ways of teaching and encouraging mental autonomy in their students. Yet true critical thinking cannot simply be added to the curriculum like driver training.

A Superficial "Fix"

Not long ago I had a disheartening look at an attempt to lay a superficial "fix" on students' thinking. I was leading a graduate course on the teaching of reading. My students, reading teachers from inner-city high schools, had been required to teach a nationally heralded program of "thinking skills." On the first night of class, they made their opinions clear. They thought this program was terrible. It was true, they acknowledged, that many of their students were extremely poor readers with comprehension scores considerably below grade level, but the teachers were required to spend class time on "thinking skills" instead of what they saw as badly needed reading instruction. Their major beef was that the program consisted of an extensive (and expensive) series of workbooks and worksheets that the students often did not understand -- but that they were required to cover.

I was skeptical. What could be so bad about teaching poor comprehenders to reason more effectively? As soon as I asked the question, I was besieged with invitations to visit their classrooms. "Come and see for yourself," they said.

I began with a teacher who was clearly one of the most lively, turned-on, and thoughtful of the group. Arriving in the high school where she taught, I was escorted by a guard to her room, where she was about to begin her first class of the day. Her twenty-eight juniors were among the statistical survivors of a system where over half their classmates had already dropped out. As the bell rang, she took a large key from her belt and locked her classroom door -- standard practice while in session. I noticed that she swung a baton resembling a small billy club -- also standard issue -- during the class period, but there was never a reason to use it. Her students were courteous, friendly, and their affection and respect were obviously returned in kind.

The day's worksheets were distributed. Each day brought a new lesson; whether or not the students had understood the last one. This lesson consisted of a long list of complex analogies calling heavily on abstract verbal categorization skills. They were phrased in high school to college level vocabulary. The teacher demonstrated solving two problems on the board, then the students started to work. I joined her as she circulated among the desks, trying to answer individual questions. It soon became clear that most of the kids, whose tested reading abilities ranged mainly between third- and eighth-grade level, could not understand this assignment at all. Indeed, as I puzzled over some of the problems, I decided they would make challenging work for a group of graduate students.

Of the class, eight or ten noble souls persisted in trying to make some sense out of this thing (the rest just filled in the blanks with any old word and then sat staring out the window or making faces at each other). Some of their reasoning was extremely sophisticated, although not of the type demanded here. One boy kept saying, "I know there's a trick, if I can only figure it out." I could not explain to him that the "trick" had already been played -- by administrators who thought they could "make" certain types of thinking happen by decree.

Soon the bell rang, the teacher unlocked her door, and the students left, convinced once again by their loving school system that learning was a mystery and they were all inadequate. I found myself admiring them for hanging in there for so long -- and feeling within myself the rage that must impel violent acts.

Of course this program's creators did not intend for it to be implemented this way. Of course the administration of this school district thought they were helping students learn better. Of course the teacher would have preferred to engage her students' interest and their genuine thinking skills with some of the many good books that would be readable, accessible, and meaningful to them. Of course, in a different context, such exercises may be useful, even enjoyable. But trying to teach the art of reasoning or problem-solving as if it were one more bit of content to be covered in a forty-minute period is clearly not the answer. The most frustrating thing for me is knowing that, with time and good teaching, many -- if not most -- of these students could learn successfully and become productive to themselves and to their community.

"Mindware"

Dr. David Perkins of Harvard believes we must take a much broader view of thinking for all children. Describing "a new science of learnable intelligence," Perkins advocates helping children and young people build flexible "mindware": abilities to organize and reorganize their patterns of thinking. He recommends getting them personally engaged -- at school and at home, when it is possible -- in mental challenges such as decision-making or inventive thinking about open-ended questions ("How are automobiles like books?" "How are rules for society like the rules for fractions?"). Clearly, the level of the challenges must fit the students, who will need guidance in developing and clarifying their ideas for more abstract questions.

Can some students just naturally reason more effectively than others? Every brain has an individual neurological basis for efficiency and effectiveness, says Perkins, but human beings are not "boxed in by neurology." His "triarchic" model of intelligence starts with inborn physical foundations in the neural system, but also includes two other layers: mastery of content (e.g., the multiplication tables, how to play chess, how to make cookies) and the development of patterns of thought. Although most current teaching concentrates on content (much of it "lower-order," he suggests), patterns of thought are, perhaps, the most important of all. Students must be shown how to use thinking in broader and more flexible ways.

"Don't assume that by getting kids just to think more, they'll get better at it," he cautions. They particularly need exposure to "metacognitive" models that enable them to use verbal skills to interpret and plan, to "mediate" experience. These skills are the foundation of good "mindware." [2]

Other leading educators urge broadened views for preparing students to think and reason effectively in tomorrow's world. Grant Wiggins, of the Coalition of Essential Schools, agrees we must stop focusing on limited goals of "content" and start thinking of education in terms of "intellectual habits."

"We don't teach kids intelligent strategies, we assume them -- but even kids in the best schools don't have them," he told me. Students soon forget three-quarters of what is commonly taught and tested. Careful reading, mathematical reasoning, note-taking skills, understanding abstract concepts such as irony or inertia -- all are habits, he says, that require extended practice throughout the school years. [3] These skills are the ones we internalize, use, and will increasingly need in the future.

In an era when more children come to schools less equipped with essential habits of mind to master "intelligent strategies," schools must reset their priorities to include them. Habits of mind, however, should not be separated from significant content. The challenge -- too often unmet -- is to infuse intellectual habits into the teaching of reading, writing, science, history, and math.

Members of a National Academy of Sciences committee recently declared current teaching to be an anachronism in an information age. Cramming children full of "factlets" and forgetting to focus on understanding is a problem exacerbated by the use of standardized tests, they point out. Citing most biology teaching as an example of an "outdated failure" that promotes memorization without understanding, this group is rewriting the entire science curriculum to include more in-depth laboratory work (another opportunity for "contextualized learning," by the way) and exploration of important concepts. [4] Computer simulations, in which students get first-hand experience solving real scientific problems, may ultimately provide one avenue to this goal.

Continuity and Meaning for the Two-Minute Mind

To develop strategic thinking, victims of the two-minute episode need help in seeing connections between ideas. Their courses should stress coherence rather than fragmentation, not only within each discipline, but across them as well (e.g., How are the trends you're studying in history related to ideas from English, art, physics, or music class?). At home, parents should keep this same principle in mind (e.g., "Have you noticed the tigers we saw in the zoo look a lot like your kitten?" "Do you think this story is anything like the one we read last week?"). But many families do not -- or cannot -- take the time to model this type of reasoning.

In previous times, points out Stanford's Dr. Eliot Eisner, many sources in children's lives outside of school provided continuity and meaning. This is no longer the case for many students where schools may provide their only opportunity for a "connected experience." Yet, most high school students he interviewed said they don't expect to encounter connections between one subject and another. "We must move away from programs and methods and incentives that breed short-term compliance and short-term memory," he insists. [5]

One way in which many teachers have already started helping students see connections and develop "intelligent strategies" is by including more "hands-on" activities. For a generation with short attention spans for listening, most successful teachers today also stress the necessity of including more visual types of presentations along with "talk." Projects and problem-solving situations in which children work alone or in groups with materials they can see and manipulate are particularly effective in math and science, but other "hands-on" activities such as dramatizations and debates can make learning real while maintaining a high level of intellectual discourse in English, history, and foreign language classes. While this type of learning has long been validated for younger children, educators have tended to forget that even adults may need to learn something for the first time by doing rather than simply hearing about it. Parents often believe that projects are only "busy work," but they, too, should recognize their value and encourage their child to work through the problem with a minimum of help -- even if the results aren't perfect! One of the most important things all parents can do, even if they are themselves very busy, is to realize that schools (or children) should not be judged merely on the basis of the number of completed worksheets that come home. Potentially great minds are also encouraged to "mess around" with real-life challenges -- and with great ideas. Neither have neat, tidy edges.

Metacognition: The Art of Knowing Your Own Mind

The human brain is unique in its abilities to reflect on its own thinking. Homes where children do not spend much time with reflective adults and schools where they are "trained" to learn mainly by memorizing data neglect this special asset. They also put children at risk for attention problems.

For metacognition, the key word is strategies, the mental processes that learners can deliberately recruit to help themselves learn or understand something new. [6] Examples of ineffective strategy use can be seen in every classroom: children who race through math papers without stopping to think about whether the answers are right or wrong, readers who absorb the words with their eyes but never ask themselves if their brain understands, students in art class who start slapping on paint before they think about the space on the paper, problem-solvers who give up after the first solution doesn't work.

Programs developed for parents and teachers in "strategy training" primarily involve recruiting the child's inner speech for thoughtful mental processing. For example, a typical training program teaches children first to "talk aloud," then to "whisper aloud," then to "whisper inside your head" in an effort to build that inner voice so frequently missing in today's distracting environments. When confronted with a problem, children may be taught to follow a four- or five-step plan such as the following:

1. Stop. Think. What is my task? (identify the problem in words)

2. What is my plan? (talk through possible steps to solution)

3. How should I begin? (analyze first step)

4. How am I doing? (keep on task)

5. Stop. Look back. How did I do? (analyze the result)

Practice with these steps is surprisingly effective in helping children with attention problems manage their behavior more effectively. Similar techniques applied to reading comprehension ("Am I understanding this? What don't I understand?") have also shown good results. It is important to note that all these successes result from using language to direct thoughts and impulses. Research shows that even some students with so-called "memory problems" have a more fundamental difficulty in managing their own thinking. [7]

Israeli Dr. Reuven Feuerstein, perhaps our most perennial optimist about the modifiability of human intelligence ("Heredity, shmeridity!" is one of his favorite lines), is convinced that the brain itself can be improved by "metacognitive strategy training" that makes human beings more resistant and adaptable to changing circumstances. "The brain can be modified or changed in a structured way to enable individuals to self-perpetuate," he maintains. "Human beings are unique in their capacity to modify themselves. I call this 'autoplasticity.'" But even before they get to school, children need adults to impose meaning on them or they will always go around the world searching for meaning," he states flatly. [8]

In the absence of this sort of experience, which he terms "mediated learning," Feuerstein believes children do not develop adequate thinking skills. As an example of non mediated learning, he describes a parent putting toys around a room and expecting a child to play. In mediated learning, the parent would place a building toy in front of a child and then sit down and demonstrate several ways to use it, talking about each alternative and allowing the child to experiment while still feeling the support of the adult.

Although Feuerstein holds parents largely responsible for this kind of training in early years, he also tells teachers they must help structure meaning for the child. Instead of simply handing a child a book to read, for example, a mediating teacher might help the student make some predictions about the plot, clarify the meaning of certain vocabulary words, and check out familiarity with necessary background information. The trick is to keep the assistance strictly within the limits of what is necessary for the child to succeed, not to offer so much help that the parent's brain does most of the growing and the child becomes overly dependent.

Although Feuerstein believes firmly in human mediation, others have suggested that computers which can be programmed to respond directly to each child's needs and ability level may eventually be able to do at least part of this job. Thus far, such electronic scaffolds are mainly used to drill on specific subject matter (e.g., multiplication tables, spelling, foreign language vocabulary), but new programs are constantly being developed.

In the meanwhile, this research has profound implications for the content of early childhood programs, especially for children disadvantaged by the absence of mediating adults in their lives. In fact, it has an important message for educational policymakers at all levels. Now that so many children lack these models, helping children structure meaning must become a priority in schools.

Speaking to a group of teachers not long ago, Feuerstein challenged them to reconsider their definition of appropriate goals for education.

"Should it be more data, units, tests? Let me remind you that many of the things you teach today will soon be obsolete! Only brains that can adapt and change themselves will ensure the continuation of our culture." [9]

WHAT ABOUT CREATIVITY AND IMAGINATION?

Feuerstein's concept of "imposing" meaning through helping a child structure understanding is very different from imposing a list of "thinking skills" on an already bite-sized curriculum. Trying to overanalyze "thinking," in fact, may result in sacrificing its inherent creativity.

Good thinking requires good analytic skills, but it also depends on imagination. Both halves of the brain, not simply the linear, analytic-verbal left hemisphere, contribute to it. The more visual, intuitive right hemisphere probably provides much of the inspiration, while the left marches along in its dutiful role as timekeeper and realist. While verbal mediation strategies are clearly effective for directing thought, they should not preclude opportunities for children to practice open-ended thinking, artistic, and nonverbal problem-solving.

Some observers, concerned about declines in creative thinking, as well as in imagination, have advocated teaching methods and classroom experiences to stimulate the right hemisphere. Although some of these so-called "right-brain" activities are fun, their specific neurological merit is viewed by scientists with considerable skepticism. Moreover, it is increasingly clear that genuine creative imagination springs from much deeper developmental roots -- which can easily get short-changed both in homes and in schools.

Children Without Their Own Visions

Do television-raised children, or hurried children who lack the time to sit and dream, grow up with poorer imaginations? Is lack of imagination one of the causes of indifferent problem-solving in today's students? One of the most troubling reports to come out of interviews with preschool teachers is that children today don't make up their own "scripts" for playing. Instead of spontaneously creating open-ended settings and actions ("You be a daddy and I'll be a mommy"; "You be a bad guy and I'll be a hero"), they reenact those they have already seen, even to repeating the dialogue ("You be Bill Cosby in the one where . . ." "Let's be the Mario Brothers when they chase the ... ").

In my survey, teachers were more divided than on any other issue when asked whether students' visual imagery and/or imagination had changed. While about half stated categorically that children today have less imagination, other responses were mixed. To my surprise (and dismay) this item was the only one frequently left blank or frankly answered as "I don't know" (or care?). Others acknowledged that their students' demonstration of imagination and creative thinking depended a lot on their own attitudes and skill as teachers. Some examples:

TV and computers seem to have blurred distinctions between the real and the imaginary; they still visualize (with luck?) but it's hard to rigorously define the images (e.g., in geometry and on maps). -- Computer instructor, Massachusetts

Just as sharp and intuitive as always. (When allowed to be!) I have integrated subject matter, added the arts, provided kinesthetic involvement, relaxation exercises, and used cooperative learning groups with the purpose of teaching social skills and addressing learning styles. The result has been renewed enthusiasm for teaching for me, and more connectedness between my students with each other and with me. It's become fun!!! again. -- Fifth-grade teacher, Oregon

Imagination is disappearing with our structured childhood lives. Parents plan the total child day leaving little free time for playing alone or free play with groups. Leisure time is almost a thing of the past. -- Elementary-school teacher, Wisconsin

I find that my children still have wonderful imaginations! -- Third-grade teacher, Texas

They are very restless and their attention span is short, but in the arts, when you can establish an atmosphere in class that helps them tap in, all the richness is still there, the imagination. No, in the arts I don't think it's ever too late. -- Director, arts integration program, Minnesota


Many books have been written to help teachers wed creative thinking and open-ended problem-solving to daily mastery of content. Suffice it to say here that if we wish to flourish technologically as well as aesthetically, it may be time to rethink priorities that have viewed creativity and imagination as "the art (or music) teacher's responsibility." Mature creativity stems from an inquiring mind with solid foundations in the major intellectual, spiritual, artistic, or aesthetic domains of human achievement, not from gimmicky "right-brain training." Habits of mind that enable a lively interchange between a student and the great thinkers, artists, and technicians of past and present are most appropriately, and indeed, most elegantly, attired in the important content of global cultures.

If we encourage our teachers to be thoughtful, well-informed, and curious themselves, we may more likely expect them to infuse the entire curriculum with creative as well as critical thinking. Otherwise, we will be forced to abandon our children -- who now, more than ever before, need good models of imaginative intellectual engagement -- to machines or "teacher-proof" kits and workbooks. Why spend time on activities such as "write an essay from the point of view of your pencil eraser" while leaving untouched the significant mental challenges of a child's world? This is about as silly as teaching children to "think" by dropping "factlets" into an intellectual abyss in the name of something called "cultural literacy."

ON "CULTURAL LITERACY"

In 1987 Dr. E. D. Hirsch published a book entitled Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know which caused many parents to wonder if they should march on schools, insisting that their children be forced to memorize more terms, names, and dates. Maintaining that one of the major reasons for lagging achievement is that students today lack a basic core of background knowledge to help them understand what they read, Hirsch and a colleague, Dr. Joseph Kelt, developed a list of everything a decently educated person should know. [10] While I would not argue that growing numbers of citizens' brains have barely been grazed by the knowledge base on which our civilization rests, I have serious reservations about the implications that have been drawn from this arguably superficial concept.

Educators who spend their time with real children in real classrooms are only too acutely aware that passing something in front of (or even temporarily through) them in the name of teaching guarantees nothing in the name of learning. Unfortunately, the mere existence of such a "list" is an invitation to simple-mindedness. Although cursory exposure to bits and bites of learning is the exact opposite of the authors' stated intent, our country's current reductionist mentality (inspired, as we have seen, by legitimate panic over the state of learning) has interpreted it to mean that simply mastering -- read "memorizing" -- the items will get us intellectual standing room.

Ironically, Dr. Kelt told me that a major change he has noted in the writing of his freshmen students at the University of Virginia is a "lack of coherence. "

"These kids, are bright," he said. "This is a seminar that they know is hard, but their writing is more jumbled than what I used to get from students. They enumerate facts rather than summarizing. They have difficulty discriminating thoughts and there is no transition between paragraphs." [11]

Who Should Teach "Cultural Literacy"?

Real access to the great concepts of any cultural heritage comes from extended, personally meaningful contact. In the past, this exposure came mainly from conversations with adults and two other sources: books, which were read out loud at home, personally perused for pleasure, or read as part of schoolwork; and lessons that were understood and internalized. Nowadays, these methods of transmission are in short supply. Many students do not read what they are supposed to, much less for pleasure, and few teachers require much essay writing. Often they are not given (or do not choose to take) sufficient time to cover a topic in depth. There is simply more to learn than there is time available. Without associations with meaning, however, items from a list don't stick well to memory.

Perhaps Dr. Hirsch's most important point is that the reading children do in school should be an important vehicle for cultural transmission. It is inexcusable for youngsters to be reading pap when research has clearly demonstrated that even first graders enjoy, remember, and understand good literature better. If we engage children's minds, in Dr. Lillian Katz's words, by integrating reading instruction with in-depth studies of historical periods, scientific ideas, etc., they will learn and remember even more.

Another point: Has no one noticed that children are very culturally literate -- except that it's for a different culture? Just make up a list of any details from Roseanne, Family Ties, Sesame Street, etc. and most kids would come out looking as smart as they really are. The problem is that our children have exposed us to ourselves, and we don't like what we see. We have shown them what is really valued in our society, and those little cultural apprentices have happily soaked it up.

If we are serious about wanting them prepared by a knowledge base to gather the intellectual fruits of world cultures, the obvious expedient is to change the content of children's television programming and use other video as enrichment. In my opinion, this should be a major responsibility of both educational and commercial networks. Otherwise, we will soon be forced to revise university-level curricula to include in-depth studies of talking animals and human buffoons.

Schools cannot plaster children with a paste of "cultural literacy" that the culture itself repudiates. Nor can schools completely counteract the powerful effects of television programming that works at direct cross-purposes with our efforts to teach children to think.

TEACHING CRITICAL THINKING -- ELECTRONICALLY

This dilemma was put into sharp relief when a recent New York Times "Education Life" supplement happened to juxtapose these two reports:

1. A major life insurance company flies their claim forms to Ireland where "a surplus of well-educated white collar workers" are eager to process them. The reason? American workers lack the educational skills as well as the motivation.

2. Because of poor habits of nutrition in American schoolchildren, the government has set a new goal to make nutrition a requirement in the school curriculum of all fifty states. [12]


People seem only too happy to blame the schools for the fact that our work force is so undereducated. At the same time, however, they insist badly needed instructional hours be used to undo the effects of television commercials that have systematically trained children in poor nutritional habits. What a preposterous situation! The first place where critical thinking should be applied is to the content of television, but if adults can't do it, why should children? Moreover, how can we lambast kids for their lack of "responsibility" at the same time we unload all of our own onto the schools? No wonder many children expect to have learning pumped into them without any reciprocal obligation.

Few dispute the fecklessness of American network programming for children. In his book Television and America's Children: A Crisis of Neglect, Edward Palmer details its inadequacies. [13] Yet no major effort has been made to train children to be critical viewers. Suffice it to repeat here that the brain tends to be deeply imprinted by repeated experience, particularly in early years. If teachers are required to reverse attitudes and values carefully inculcated by the media, they will have little time to bind up its intellectual casualties.

Yet the reality of the tube in the lives of the current generation is undeniable. Schools will have to assume a more positive -- and educational -- role in guiding children, who are by nature "visually vulnerable," into analysis and evaluation of its content. "The potential of our new electronic teachers is awesome," states Ernest Boyer in his introduction to Palmer's book. "Educators would be naive to ignore these influences, which have become, in effect, a new curriculum." [14]

In her book, Mind and Media, Patricia Greenfield points out that visual literacy must now be taught in addition to print literacy. [15] She recommends specific programs to turn children from passive into active consumers of all kinds of visual material. Using network programs to teach questioning techniques, studying the effects of devices such as zooms and pans, analyzing plot structures and comparing them to those of literature, and leading critical discussions of the art of persuasion are all ideas that might be applied in homes as well as in schools. Classroom production of videotapes that children plan, write scripts for, and then analyze can help put them in control of the medium instead of vice versa.

Greenfield also advocates more effective uses of television to reduce the educational gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged children, citing successful experiments in Third World countries with video designed to make children interactive participants in learning. In Niger, for example, children were successfully taught French by programs that incorporated interactive language instruction. As they engaged in structured follow-up exercises with classroom aides, they became "more actors than spectators," and learning proceeded apace.

A New Curriculum

Cognitive psychologist Dr. Michael Posner believes that schools may have to change in even more fundamental ways in response to an electronic age. Children soon observe, he suggests, that a school with a rigid schedule is very different from the more flexible environments in the real world of work. Children see adults looking at television and working at computer displays more than they see them reading and writing. "But we still act as if the only important skills were reading and writing," he points out. [16]

"We remain myopically obsessed with print literacies while our pupils continue living in a world that is increasingly high-tech and electronically visual and auditory," wrote an editor of Language Arts, published by the National Council for Teachers of English. Instead of avoiding questions of how "computer literacy" or "visual literacy" relate to critical thinking and learning, educators must broaden their research and include their constructive uses.

THE COMPUTERIZED BRAIN

As we turn now to consider future definitions of "thinking," we move into an area where there are some rather unsettling questions and no answers. One of the most important is how adaptive our children's "new brains" will prove to be in a culture that may be in the process of evolution away from print-based representations of knowledge.

Asking "experts" what they think computers will do to children's brains elicits little agreement.

1. "A computer is simply a caricature of the left hemisphere, just as video games are a caricature of the right. I think that working with computers will definitely make kids more left-brained."

2. "Computers can do all the detail work, but humans have to have the 'big picture' of what they want the machine to do. And they have to 'see' and plan an overall strategy. When kids are freed of the details, I think working with computers may enable them to be more right-brained!"


The answer I like best was suggested by Dr. Jeannine Herron, director of California Neuropsychology Services, who works on developing computer software as an educational tool.

"I think computers are going to enable us to stretch the limits of both global and linear. If they want detail, they can get very fine detail, but they can also get a wider, very global perspective. A child who can browse through great photographs of the dust-bowl era is certainly getting an overall concept of that historical period. But I don't think we'll be able to build the linkages between those two kinds of systems unless the experience is meaningful for the child." [17]

In order to understand the effects computers may have on the user's thinking skills, we must start with the major difference between artificial and "real" intelligence.

Sequential and Parallel Processing

Normal human brains have at their disposal two complementary methods of processing information: sequential and simultaneous (often called parallel). Sequential processing takes one bite at a time: A, then B, therefore C, etc. ("If the suspect entered the office at 2:30, then the secretary would have just returned from her coffee break, and therefore she would have seen him." "If x = 3 and y = 5, then x + y = 8") and is primarily associated with the left hemisphere.

The opposite -- but, for us, interlocking way of solving problems is called parallel, or simultaneous, processing because many associations become activated at the same time. This sort of thinking has been compared to a "ripple" effect, in which A elicits a wide network of connections with other sets of associations and ideas, often represented in images. The linkages may be well learned or spontaneous and unique, as in the process of first feeling, then "seeing," then articulating a metaphor. Artists, inventors, writers, and other creative thinkers depend heavily on simultaneous processing, which is more often associated with the right hemisphere. Of course, at the point where it becomes necessary to articulate the image, hypothesis, or general principle on a typewriter, canvas, musical score, or graph paper, sequential skills assume their own value.

Human brains continually blend simultaneous and sequential processing, although, as with learning "styles," different individuals may tend to favor one form over another. The way the brain is trained probably helps determine the balance. The demands of the task may also nudge the brain into one mode or another.

The "artificial intelligence" (AI) of most present-day computers represents sequential processing carried to an extreme. Traditional AI can deal only with one piece of data at a time, and computers act irritable if items and instructions don't arrive in the proper order, as anyone who has responded to the cybernetic cry of anguish -- "syntax error" -- can attest. Until new prototypes of artificial intelligence are widespread (some which use parallel processing are even now becoming available), computers are locked into a mentality that makes even the most unimaginative human number-cruncher look like a creative genius. The reason, of course, is that the human has two hemispheres cushioned by some nice soft emotional centers; the machine has, in essence, only part of a left hemisphere and no feelings that we know of.

I find it interesting to speculate -- because there is little research available -- on the physical effects of interactions between the human and this machine brain. As of now, when children meet up with AI, they are usually involved in one of the following types of applications:

1. Drill and practice programs (e.g., games to learn the multiplication tables, practice a spelling list, place the state capitals on a map)

2. Programming (e.g., giving the machine a series of commands to make it draw a square or compute gas mileage; these must be presented to the machine in its own language and its own one-step-at-a-time logic)

3. Working with data bases (e.g., accessing a list and selected summaries of all the articles on parakeets published since 1973; creating a data base in which all the local birds from your area are listed and categorized according to type of beak, feathers, color, etc.)

4. Simulations (e. g., You are a pioneer about to set out on the Oregon Trail. You are given a budget and must choose from a "menu" of supplies; as the trip progresses, you undergo various hardships and must make decisions along the trail. You may or may not make it to Oregon. It is assumed you will learn some history and some decision-making skills in the process. Video games are also simulations.)

5. Word processing (e.g., the computer as an advanced form of memory typewriter)

These different uses call on very different types of mental processing, the implications of which have barely been tapped. I will touch here on just a few of the most relevant issues in terms of the development of thinking skills.

Learning to Talk to Machines: Accurately!

Teaching children to program a present-day computer virtually demands they use precise, analytic-sequential reasoning (e.g., If ... then ... ). I have seen many youngsters whose minds do not naturally tend to work this way (and little children's, particularly, do not) become extremely frustrated because they can't just "make it understand" by telling it, "You know . . ."

Other uses of the computer also require precision of language. Dr. Judah Schwartz of the Education Department at MIT points out that getting the computer to work properly with data bases does not permit "sloppy" understanding of words such as and, or, or not. Try to figure out this one:

I have watched youngsters not understand why a data base on United States presidents, when queried about the number of presidents born in Massachusetts and Vermont, insisted on claiming that no presidents were born in Massachusetts and Vermont [if you didn't get it the first time, neither did I!]. Clearly the problem has nothing to do with the technology. Rather we need to educate people to use the language with much greater precision than they are presently accustomed to using. [18]


Schwartz emphasizes that similar "analytic barbarism" causes most of people's trouble with spreadsheets (where they may try to add months to dollars, etc.). Computers simply won't buy slushy language or slushy thought, at least as the machine has been programmed to define it.

Will working with computers teach children better habits of orderly thinking? Thus far, research offers contradictory views. On one hand, programming a computer requires that a student be able to break a problem down into logical, sequential units and then accurately give this information to the machine. We are beginning to learn, however, that students whose brains do not take naturally to this way of thinking usually avoid programming in the same way people who think they lack drawing ability flee from art classes.

"Watching students try to program teaches me a great deal about the way they think, but I don't believe it makes them better thinkers -- at least not the way we're teaching it now," one experienced teacher told me.

On the other hand, computer programming might encourage those who are already too focused on details to obsess even more. Some theorists fear that too much interaction with artificial intelligence will magnify the role of linearity, logic, and rule-governed thinking in our culture to the point where we might be in danger of retreating into a "flattened, mechanical view of human nature." [19] Most agree that computers are a tool with almost unlimited potential, but until they can engage in parallel as well as simultaneous processing, they will not only be a poor match, but also a poor model for most forms of human reasoning. [20]

At this point, computers can perform many functions of the brain's storehouse. Nonetheless, they still have to depend on the executive and general reasoning abilities of the human brain. I venture to say it will be a long time, if ever, before prefrontal, emotional, and motivational centers can be attached to a hard disc. Thus it may be especially important to make sure our children retain these capabilities themselves.

Computer as Scribe

Children who learn to use word processing programs become more fluent writers and are more willing to revise what they write. Many who have trouble with mechanical aspects of handwriting and spelling find they can express their ideas successfully for the first time. Word processing programs are, without doubt, one of the most commonly used and appreciated computer uses in the classroom.

As a dedicated fan of my own electronic amanuensis, however, I must acknowledge that writing on a screen changes, not only the experience itself, but also the resulting prose. In addition to the danger of prolixity, many writers feel they tend to lose a sense of the "gestalt" of the piece and find it necessary to revert frequently to "hard copy" (paper printouts) to understand their own line of reasoning and see how the parts fit together. Perhaps this is because we initially programmed our brains to read and write on paper; perhaps it is an inherent problem in the technology.

An outstanding English teacher commented that she has no trouble telling which of her students' essays started life on the computer. "They don't link ideas -- they just write one thing, and then they write another one, and they don't seem to see or develop the relationships between them."

Assuredly, we must encourage students to use the computer as a tool, but also teach them to rise above its ineluctable linearity and use the parallel processing capabilities of their own human brains.

The Electronic ZPD

Computers make good "coaches" for specific sorts of skills because they can be programmed to operate directly within the "zone of proximal development" described earlier. Schoolchildren already show success working with individual machine "tutors" to perfect routine skills. It must be remembered, however, that interaction with any kind of computer software really boils down to interacting with the intelligence of the person who programmed the software. Naturally, some are better than others.

With perfection of machines that can process human speaking and "listening," children may someday have personally responsive tutors for oral language. (But how about the melody, the inflection, the "body language"?) Spelling "checkers" that now act simply as correcting devices might be programmed to notice patterns of errors, diagnose the types of help a poor speller needs, and develop drills for a personal tutoring session on spelling rules needed by that particular individual. Grammar "readers" may ultimately be able to extend learning as well as correct and reshape usage. The ones so far available for written text, unfortunately, are singularly pedantic and may actually strip a manuscript of style and complex usage, nuance not being a forte of the machine's intelligence.

The possibilities are limitless, but they must be wisely sifted and monitored. Even simulation games that are apparently quite educational (e.g., "Oregon Trail") require a good teacher nearby. Otherwise, it often gets treated by the youngsters simply as a game of chance, with little attention to the educational context.

Programs to teach children -- or even graduate students -- to reason logically have similarly earned mixed reviews. Although we will see increased attention to this important potential application, programs now available are not capable of making "fuzzy" thinkers into logicians. [21] Nor has anyone yet demonstrated exactly what kinds of global, "big picture" skills computer uses may engender. Getting a "view" of the way steps might fit together to produce a desired result when writing a program, deciding which combination of statistical programs to use to analyze a varied set of data, or seeing categorical relationships between items in a data base all tap aspects of this ability. There is some evidence that extensive work with programs that relate visual-spatial activity on the screen to the child's own physical movements in space (e.g., LOGO) may improve at least some types of visual-spatial reasoning, but overall, the jury is still out.

Computer scaffolding offers wonderful possibilities for the disabled. It can help children who have orthopedic or learning handicaps express their intelligence in ways heretofore unavailable. It may also hold potential for more intensive, individual work with disadvantaged children who are, unfortunately, placed in classrooms without enough teachers to meet their particular learning needs. The attention-getting format of computer programs has been shown to be appealing even to children who have acquired a basic mistrust of school learning. One observer cautioned, however, that cozying up to software can never completely replace rubbing up against good teachers.

"In the end it is the poor who will be chained to the computer; the rich will get teachers." [22]

As always, too, the problem of "transfer" emerges. Can reading from a screen or learning to hunt and peck on a keyboard be used to improve proficiency and pleasure in real reading and writing? Or will machine analogues become the "real" processes? With electronic books now available, it may soon be hard to tell.

For Young Children: Artificial or Real Intelligence?

While dining not long ago with a scientist who probes the workings of the brain, I enjoyed hearing about the intellectual exploits of his three-year-old daughter, clearly the apple of her Daddy's eye. I enjoyed his stories, that is, until we got to dinosaurs.

"She can recognize all the names when she sees them on the computer screen: Tyrannosaurus Rex, Brontosaurus, whatever -- and she matches them right up to the pictures'" he said happily. "The program we got her even teaches about what each one ate, and whether they could fly, and all kinds of stuff. It's amazing!"

I didn't say what was really on my mind at that point . . . something like, "I'm sure that will be really useful for her when she takes her first course in paleontology." Being something of a wimp in the presence of those who spend their days rooting around in other people's brains, I only said,

"And how long did it take her to learn all this?"

"Oh, she loves her computer. She spends a lot of time at it. When my wife and I are busy we would much rather see her there than watching TV. At least we know she's doing something educational."

"Does your little girl ever just play -- by herself, or with other little kids?"

"Oh, sure." He thought for a moment. "But she really loves that computer! Isn't it wonderful how much they can learn at this age?"

"What do you think that computer is doing to her brain?" I asked.

He paused. "You know," he said slowly, "I never thought about it. I really haven't a clue."

Many parents with far less scientific sophistication than this man also don't have a clue as to what early use of computers can do to children's brains. The long-term neurological effects of this type of experience are unknown -- and, very likely, unknowable. We do know that short-changing real-life social and fantasy play is a big mistake. Yet many adults understandably believe that if a child looks as if she's mastering something that they themselves view as complicated, it must mean the kid is getting really smart. But does it?

Many child development authorities question how much, if any, of preschoolers' time should be spent sitting at a computer terminal. "Young children who will grow up in a high-tech world need a low-tech, high-touch environment," insists Dr. Lillian Katz. [23] Early childhood is a special time for brain development of special systems that will underlie many different kinds of learning; even executive centers have already begun to develop by age two. While many types of computer programs sold for young children may be useful to get specific kinds of learning into older brains, research has not yet supported their value for preschoolers.

What might be wrong with giving children a leg up on all the interesting facts in our cultural data base? First of all, many programs of this sort use paired associate learning (e.g., matching names, letters, or numerals with pictures), which is not a high-level skill and not one that builds many widespread neural connections. For some children, a preoccupation with memorizing bits of information may even herald a serious learning disorder. [24] Even when the programs call on more complex skills (e.g., categorizing attributes of dinosaurs), feeding the brain with too much vicarious experience (e.g., words and pictures on a computer monitor) instead of real ones (e.g., investigating the behaviors of actual kittens, goldfish, ants, salamanders or whatever) or with feelable, manipulable objects (e.g., dolls, stuffed animals, making dinosaur models out of clay, if the child is genuinely interested in dinosaurs) could place artificial constraints on its natural developmental needs. The preschool brain's main job is to learn the principles by which the real world operates and to organize and integrate sensory information with body movement, "touch," and "feel." It needs much more emphasis on laying the foundations of control systems for attention and motivation than on jamming the storehouse full of data that makes it look "smart" to adults.

The child's need to initiate and feel "in charge" of her own brain's learning is another issue to consider. Commercial computer programs are designed to attract and hold attention, but programming a youngster to expect to receive information without independent mental exploration and organization may be a grave error -- which won't become apparent until she can't organize herself around a homework assignment or a job that requires initiative. More commonplace activities, such as figuring out how to nail two boards together, organizing a game, or creating a doll house out of a shoebox may actually form a better basis for real-world intelligence.

The last thing today's children need is more bits of learning without the underlying experiential frameworks to hang them onto. In tomorrow's world of instant information access, activities like memorizing the names and characteristics of dinosaurs could be as anachronistic as the creatures in question. Moreover, children who have concentrated on getting the right answer rather than on building the independent reasoning to ask the right question, or who, by replacing playtime with too much computer time have failed to develop "big picture" frameworks from self-initiated experience, may become dinosaurs themselves.

Looking Ahead

Computers offer extraordinary potential as brain accessories, coaches for certain types of skills, and motivators. Their greatest asset may ultimately lie in their limitations -- which will force the human brain to stand back and reflect on the issues beyond the data -- if it has developed that ability.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:53 am

CHAPTER 15: Expanding Minds

When cultures change and new cultural tasks give rise to new demands for cognitive competence, human plasticity makes it possible for the new outcomes to be reached. -- JOHN U. OGBU [1]

Technology is here to stay. We have to be damn sure we do it right -- whatever "right" means. Therein lies the vision -- and the challenge. -- GARY PETERSON, SUPERINTENDENT, LEARNERS' MODEL TECHNOLOGY PROJECT, CA


In a large classroom, groups of teachers cluster around computer monitors. Their charged intensity belies the summer heat that presses against the air-conditioned building, a contemporary anachronism on a quiet, white-pillared campus whose traditions reach back well over a century. But no one is gazing out the window at the green lawns, white clapboard buildings, and gracious, overarching trees. As their instructor walks to the center of the room, some remain engrossed; others look up with an expression that can best be described as dazed.

"Well," he says. "You came to this workshop to learn the newest methods for teaching math, and I've just shown you a forty-five-dollar computer program that can do all the operations of algebra, trig, and calculus. This afternoon I will demonstrate a pocket calculator that will soon be available which can do graphing and geometry. Many of you spend up to eighty percent of your class time teaching kids to do these calculations that a simple program can now perform almost instantly. So, I've only got one question. What do you plan to do for the rest of your life?"

"Retire!" says one man, obviously eager to head back to his green-shuttered dormitory.

"Wait! This is exciting!" exclaims another. "Think of the problems we'll be able to work on. We'll have to teach the kids to understand the questions. Even if the machines know how, somebody's going to have to know why. Students can't plug in the right data and know what operations to use unless they understand the problem."

As the group adjourns for lunch, I approach the leader, Lew Romagnano, to thank him for allowing me to sit in on this impressive demonstration.

"What sort of impact do you think computers will have on the human brain?" I ask him.

"Who knows. You're the brain person, not me! Probably brains will get lots bigger because we won't have all this computation nonsense to worry about anymore. Seriously, you're talking about real mathematical thinking -- patterns you can see -- without doing hours of arithmetic. If we didn't have to teach long division for six months in the fifth grade, think what else we could teach -- probability, statistics, geometry, mathematical reasoning. It's sure to have some sort of effect on the brain."

MINDS IN AN "INFORMATION AGE"

As I have worked on this book, my file optimistically labeled "Future Minds" has overflowed and been expanded until it has finally assumed book-length proportions of its own. I search it to discover what may happen to a human brain that takes on machines as intellectual boonfellows, but I don't find any answers. Even the dimensions of the question, in fact, aren't totally clear. The first is doubtless what new demands will be placed on the human mind as a function of the "information age."

With a proliferation of new technology, occupational demands on the human brain are shifting from direct manipulation of the physical universe (e.g., putting parts together on an assembly line, driving a tractor, going to a library to look up research articles, mixing chemicals in a lab, making change from a cash register) to managing machines that perform these functions. The machines, in turn, churn forth and instantly transmit inhuman quantities of data. The amount of available information is now estimated to double every two years -- an astounding harbinger of future possibilities, but an alarming reminder that we now need machines to manage our knowledge as well as our commerce.

It is estimated that 40% of new investment in plant and equipment is for electronic data-shufflers. A proliferation of computers, video, telecommunications, copying and FAX machines, and various permutations among them, encapsulate and speed the pace of human discourse.

These changes inevitably cause fundamental shifts in mental activity. Machines become extensions of our brains. Thinking is referred to as "information processing"; working requires more and more ability to access, manipulate, and use data. The worker of the future, we are told, must be prepared to act as an individual manager of both the information and the technological tools by which it is assembled: computer memory banks and data bases, electronic libraries, video encyclopedias, etc. Meanwhile, with instantaneous transmission of written as well as oral communication all over the world, the human "patience curve" wavers perceptibly.

But someone has to "see the patterns," figure out the purpose and the plan for this frenetic fact-factory. One might also hope that people will retain enough control to reflect on where it is all taking us -- and why.

Subtle shifts in what the human brain is required to do will eventually cause it to modify itself for new uses, at least in those who are either young or sufficiently motivated. Speculations naturally abound as to what these effects may be, but if I restricted this chapter to what has been proven about technology's ultimate impact on brains, it would end right here.

Nevertheless, since these electronic developers are lining up to stake out a claim in the brains of today's children, I believe we should try to figure out a few more questions to ask before we sign the contract. We have already witnessed clear changes in children's habits of mind: declining verbal skills, changing patterns of attention, a less reflective approach to problem-solving. How might they fit with our conjectures about the future? Are human brains about to get caught in the experiential fragmentation of machine technology, or will they gain broader abilities to stand back and understand what is happening?

EVOLVING BRAINS?

One of the questions I often get after presenting the ideas set forth in this book is whether the changes so consistently observed in students may represent some sort of evolutionary trend. Is it possible that print literacy and/or the process of extended mental reflection are merely evolutionary way stations for a species en route to bigger and better things? As we saw in Chapter 3, neuroscientists have proposed that the inner workings of the brain itself adapt themselves to new environments through a Darwinian model of competitive selection.

Scientists agree that generational changes in cognitive abilities are probably part of an evolutionary process. Dr. Steven Jay Gould, noted evolutionary biologist and authority on Darwinian theory, believes such changes are primarily associated with a dynamic process of "cultural evolution." Gould believes that genetic changes, in the strict Darwinian sense, take far too long to be so readily noticed, although they, too, are doubtless occurring over the long march of human mental development.

Most geneticists, of course, do not believe that simply using the organs of one's body differently can cause heritable changes in the underlying genes. If some motor neurons in a monkey's brain wither because he lost the use of two fingers, his offspring will not be born with either the fingers or the neurons missing.

For humans, however, so-called "inheritance" of intellectual traits and habits is possible, because it happens differently, says Gould. Even Darwin believed that "cultural evolution," which occurs only in human societies, causes changes in knowledge and behavior that can then be transmitted across the generations. As Gould explains it,

Human uniqueness resides primarily in our brains. It is expressed in the culture built upon our intelligence and the power it gives us to manipulate the world. Cultural evolution can proceed so quickly because it operates, as biological evolution does not, in the "Lamarckian" mode -- by the inheritance of acquired characters. Whatever one generation learns it can pass on to the next by writing, instruction, inculcation, ritual, tradition, and a host of methods that humans have developed to assure continuity in culture. [2]


Cultural evolution is not only rapid, he says, but also readily reversible from generation to generation because it is not coded in the genes. Other scientists agree that human gray matter is "capable of meeting widely varying cultural assumptions" and thus may change rather rapidly. Each generation of human brains seems to have the potential to develop new types of neural networks or find new combinations for old ones that haven't been fully tapped.

Another expert told me he explains the mental flexibility of our species as somewhat analogous to a pitcher of martinis at a cocktail party. The same (genetic) ingredients are always there -- gin and vermouth -- but over the course of the evening the hostess may add more of one or the other and the mixture will change slightly, although it's still a martini. The genetic basis of the human brain may be similarly constant, but its ingredients can get mixed and matched differently during the process of adaptation.

One reason inherited forms of intelligence or behavior may shift, say some scientists, is that genes can be either turned on or turned off to varying degrees by environmental demand. As a species, we have talents we probably haven't even used yet. According to Gould, human brains are "enormously complex computers" that can perform a wide variety of tasks in addition to the ones they first evolved to perform:

I do not doubt that natural selection acted in building our oversized brains -- and I am equally confident that our brains became large as an adaptation for definite roles. . . . [These complex brain] computers were built for reasons, but possess an almost terrifying array of additional capacities. [3]


Gould adds, incidentally, that evolutionary design can degenerate as well as improve. [4] Apparently, as another authority opined, our current state represents "not a package of perfection, but a package of compromises." [5] Will we continue to "improve"? By what standards can we judge?

Dr. Jerome Bruner offered a thoughtful commentary to my questions about changing brains in a technological age. "The only thing I can say with some degree of certainty," he wrote, "is that the evolution of human brain function has changed principally in response to the linkage between human beings and different tool systems. It would seem as if technology and its development leads to a new basis of selection. . . surely there must be a variety of changes in progress that resulted from writing systems, even though writing systems were introduced only a short time ago as far as we reckon evolutionary time. And now, of course, we have computers and video systems, and how long before the selection pattern changes as a result of these?"

But, he advised, we should first worry about more practical issues. "The fact of the matter is that we need a much broader distribution of high skills to run this culture than ever was needed before, and the failure to produce that distribution has been the cause of serious alienation. If we produce a two-tier society, it means in effect that we have two separate sets of evolutionary pressures operating -- one within the elite group that calls for an acceleration of ability, and one within an underclass where no such pressure operates.

"See what you can make of that," he concluded. [6]

What kinds of intelligence will be most likely to produce these new forms of "high skills"? That must be the next question.

NEW INTELLIGENCES?

The cognitive skills required by the new computer technology require precise definitions, linear thinking, precise rules and algorithms for thinking and acting. -- Committee on Correspondence on the Future of Public Education [7]

We're going to have to get out of this linear model of thinking. I suppose major change is the only way we are going to break loose from the formal mind and become general systems thinkers in time for species preservation to occur. We've pretty much, for the time being, exhausted the scientific method. We've objectified life about as far as it can be objectified -- and it hasn't worked. You can only go so far with the right leg, now it's time to move the left leg forward for a while. -- Dr. Dee Coulter, Naropa Institute


Obviously, no agreement exists on the nature of the "new intelligences." Many claim that mental abilities for the future must include widened perspectives, a broader range of mental skills, and a great deal of open-ended imagination to come up with solutions to the world's big problems. On the other hand, some believe we should adapt our human mentalities more closely to the precision of the machines.

One issue concerns the kinds of intelligence we should encourage in children who will live in a world where machines can do most of the mental scut work. What should we be teaching if the human brain will soon be relieved of the responsibility for doing arithmetic problems, spelling accurately, writing by hand, and memorizing data? At some time in the not-too-distant future, every student -- at least in districts where funding is available -- may work at a computer station where all these operations will be performed by a machine. Computerized data bases will instantly access any type of information, sort and summarize it. Word processing programs, perhaps with the aid of spelling, grammar, and punctuation checkers, and outlining programs designed to help the writer organize ideas, will enable rapid note-taking and report writing.

At some point, this equipment may become pocket-sized -- a portable, permanent adjunct to the brain's memory systems. What will be important to learn then? Probably not the names and dates of the kings of England or the formula for the area of a parallelogram.

Glimpses of Electronic Learning

Some of the applications already available or on the drawing boards open astonishing windows onto future learning. If a student wants to learn about the French Revolution, for instance, here is a not-so-imaginary scenario: A program will project on her monitor screen a written and/or narrated summary of facts and events, lists and/or abstracts of relevant historical research, an animated time line of key events with a visual enactment of important scenes, set to the music of the period. She may choose to drill herself on the words of the "La Marseillaise" or some French verb tenses, or she may choose a program that lets her wander through the Louvre, browsing among relevant paintings. She might participate in a mock interview with Marat or visit the prisoners in the Bastille -- in French with English translation, or vice versa. She may then choose to perfect her French vocabulary and spelling by playing a game; each time she gets an answer correct, she saves one aristocrat from the guillotine. She will then visit a French street market to use the words she has just learned in a conversation on interactive video that will also check out her accent and idioms (computers that can accurately hear and "understand" children's voices are not yet available, but there is every reason to believe they will be before too long). Or she may boot up a "simulation" in which she assumes the role of a leader on either side of the dispute, sits in on planning sessions where she makes decisions about key turning points in the Revolution, and then learns the historical consequences of her choices.

These activities, prototypes for most of which are already available, assuredly understate the possibilities of the next decade. Defining the "basics" that children will still need to master in such a world will get you a good argument among any group of educators. Maximizing the effectiveness of such technology may require well-reasoned reconsideration of some long-cherished ideas about who teaches what to whom, when, and how.

Technology will enable radical changes in teaching formats. Whether or not children will still need classrooms -- or even human teachers -- in the new age of instant communication is also a nice discussion-starter. With equipment developed by IBM, students even now can sit at home -- or in different parts of the country (world?) -- with computerized video monitors through which they communicate instantaneously with classmates and instructor. The teacher can ask a question and see an immediate tally on his screen of every student's response, so he knows immediately who is understanding and who is not. Of course, such questions tend, at least so far, to be of the multiple-choice variety. Will we still need oral language when we spend most of our time on keyboards or pushing buttons? What new sorts of perceptual or mental skills will be required? And what will happen to some of the old ones -- not the least of which is interpersonal/emotional development -- as the brain devotes its time and connectivity to different challenges?

Forward to the "Basics": What Will They Be?

The computer age may also promote different types of learning abilities than the ones traditionally valued and rewarded. Facility for memorization, spelling, or good handwriting may not seem all that important anymore. Some people believe these basic disciplines should still be stressed because they build up children's brains for other types of thinking, but psychologists are unsure about the generalizability of specific types of "mental exercise." It may be better, they say, to work on general reasoning ability so the child will be able to learn all types of new skills, since many -- perhaps most -- of the occupations they may eventually pursue haven't even been invented yet! Children clearly need to be taught habits of mental self-discipline, but no one has clearly established the best way to do so.

Will children still need oral language skills? Very likely, both for personal communication and as a foundation for reading and writing -- even if it is connected with a computer screen. A recent government report entitled "Technology and the American Transition" acknowledged that all workers will need more mental flexibility than has previously been the case. Yet the "protean" mentality that will prosper in the new work force must still possess sophisticated verbal skills. "The talents needed are not clever hands or a strong back," the report concludes, "but rather the ability to understand instructions and poorly written manuals, ask questions, assimilate unfamiliar information and work with unfamiliar teams." [8]

Overall, most thoughtful people who have considered the skills that will be needed -- and reinforced -- in brains of the future agree that higher-level abilities will be required from everyone. Yet, according to Priscilla Vail, common definitions of what constitutes "higher-level" skills may also change. She points out that the educated person used to be one who could find information; now, with a flood of data available, the educated mind is not the one that can master the facts, but the one able to ask the "winnowing question."

"The ones who have kept alive their ability to play with patterns, to experiment -- they will be the ones who can make use of what technology has to offer. Those whose focus has been on getting the correct answers to get a high score will be obsolete!" [9]

Dr. Howard Gardner has reminded us that intelligence usually gets defined in terms of which individuals can solve the problems or create the products that are valued in the culture at any given time. Brain systems for different types of intelligence are relatively discrete; improving one will not necessarily improve others (e. g., playing video games will not make children faster readers; learning the organization needed to write computer programs will probably not improve their skills in cleaning up their rooms). Moreover, when time and practice are devoted to one set of skills, space for others may be preempted. It appears as if minds that will be most valued in the future will need to have a remarkable combination of "big picture" reasoning and analytic acuity. They will be able to "see" patterns, but also communicate and interpret language accurately. Yet some believe that these two types of abilities are fundamentally at odds with each other.

DUAL ABILITIES IN THE UNIFIED MIND

It is quite possible that linear thinking, as opposed to imagery thinking, has been one of our handicaps in trying to solve [many of our] pressing worldwide problems. The mode of thinking we need ... must help us to visualize the connections among all parts of the problem. This is where imagery is a powerful thinking tool, as it has been for scientists, including Einstein. -- Mary Alice White, Teachers College, Columbia [10]

In general the competent uses of data bases requires a careful, rather than a sloppy understanding of ... words. We need to educate people to use the language with much greater precision than they are presently accustomed to using. -- Judah L. Schwartz, MIT [11]


Visual Literacy

A sixth-grade student nervously walks to the front of the classroom to present his research report on different types of aircraft. Inserting a video cassette into a monitor, he presses a button and the presentation begins. A series of film clips illustrates aviation scenes. As each type of plane is shown, the student reads a brief sentence introducing it, then remains silent as his classmates watch the remainder of the clip. As the video ends, a plane explodes in midair. The audience cheers. The teacher compliments the "author" on his creativity.

This "demonstration lesson" of uses of video in the classroom elicits a mixed response from school principals invited to view it. Some are delighted. "The boy showed a lot of imagination." "Endless possibilities." "Look how intent those kids were . . . they rarely listen that well!"

Others are more skeptical, particularly about the absence of extended narrative. The pictures, indeed, tell the story, but what happened to reading, writing, and reasoning? The rapt attention of the child's classmates is questioned. Is their response to the screen merely conditioned -- but uncritical? Is this the shadow of the future? Should we be worried?

Excerpts from a "video encyclopedia" are shown. In one "entry" a contemporary demagogue is seen delivering a segment of an emotionally charged oration. This man is a persuader and his delivery capitalizes on body language; his views are also controversial. But no analysis accompanies this "entry"; encyclopedias are, after all, compilations of fact. This film is an accurate record of what occurred -- but is it "fact"? Who can guarantee students access to opposing views? Who will show them how to ask the winnowing questions?

Video is persuasive. For immature viewers -- and perhaps for mature ones as well -- it pulls on emotions and evokes mood more readily than does print. Visual media are often accused of being more subjective. Their immediacy may bias against thoughtful analysis, at least for people untrained in critical viewing. A series of images may also tell a more fragmented story than the linked ideas that follow each other in a text. Certain types of visual information (e.g., television) may require less effortful processing than print media. Yet visual media are effective conveyers of some aspects of experience. Seeing film clips from a war can amplify and add perspective to reading about it in a history book. Visual images encourage intuitive response. Video presentations also have unlimited boundaries of time and space; they are free from the narrative chronology of text. Moreover, most brains tend to retain colorful visual images more readily than what they have heard or seen in print.

The growing question, of course, is whether so-called "visual literacies" could replace print. Will instruction manuals of the future rely on pictures and diagrams instead of words? Will holistic/emotional responses blot out more precise verbal/analytic forms of reasoning? Might human reasoning actually rise to higher levels if we were unencumbered by the constraints of syntax and paragraph structure? Are we on the cusp of a major alteration in the way the human brain processes information? After all, human beings have been receiving information from visual and interpersonal communication for over ten thousand years; they have only been getting it from readily available print during the last five hundred.

Thought Without Language

Should we regard rock videos replacing Shakespeare as an evolutionary advance? Does language place artificial constraints on ideas that might be liberated by nonverbal reasoning? Is thought possible without any sort of symbol system? In The Dancing Wu Li Masters, Gary Zukav explains how he thinks reality gets fragmented by the use of symbols -- particularly words. As an example he uses happiness, a global state of being that cannot fairly be boiled down to a symbol. Pinning a word onto this indescribable state changes it to an abstraction, a concept, rather than a real experience. "Symbols and experience do not follow the same rules," states Zukav. "Undifferentiated reality is inexpressible." The goal of "pure awareness" sought by Eastern religions is presumably an example of transcending the need to distort understanding by trying to communicate it.

Zukav's main point is that holistic approaches to reality, which he relates to the right hemisphere of the brain, more accurately represent the principles of our physical world, exemplified in physics and mathematics. Their reality, he claims, is actually distorted by forcing them into symbols. Although he does not solve the problem of how to communicate ideas "which the poetic intuition may apprehend, but which the intellect can never fully grasp," he recommends broadening our outlook into the "higher dimensions of human experience." [12]

So-called "nonverbal thought," freed from the constraints of language, is a recognized vehicle for artists, musicians, inventors, engineers, mathematicians, and athletes. [13] Nonverbal thought is not always a poetic and undifferentiated whole, but can also relate to much more mundane matters and proceed sequentially (e.g., picturing the steps in assembling a machine or turning it over in one's mind and examining the parts or mentally rehearsing the sequence of body movements in a tennis serve). Much important experience can't be reduced to verbal descriptions. Yet in schools, traditionally, the senses have had little status after kindergarten.

"Even in engineering school, a course in 'visual thinking' is considered an aberration," says one critic who believes that too much emphasis on verbal learning places conceptual limits on inventiveness. By neglecting such studies as mechanical drawing for all students, he insists, we are cutting out a big portion of an important, and valid, form of reasoning. [14]

Can computers guide people in nonverbal reasoning? Dr. Ralph Grubb of IBM is an enthusiastic advocate of this idea. Computerized simulations of math, engineering, architectural, and scientific problems will help us get away from our "tyranny of text" and move into more visual thinking, he claims. For example, computers can now produce three-dimensional models of scientific data, graphs or representations that can enable a manager to "see" all the aspects of a complex financial situation, or simulations that allow an architect to take a visual "walk" through a building she is designing. Although, to the uninitiated, some of these simulations are totally baffling, they are doubtless the mode through which much information will be represented in the future. "Visual metaphors will strip away needless complexity and get right down to the idea," he said. "Flexibility is the key -- you have to be able to shift between perspectives." [15]

When I was talking with Dr. Grubb, however, I noticed that all his examples involved mathematical, mechanical, or artistic fields. Can nonverbal metaphors also mediate the study of history? Is body language a good criterion for judging a political candidate? Perhaps we should make sure the "tyranny of text" gets supplemented rather than replaced.

Some thought certainly needs to move beyond (or remain before) words. Most people who have studied this question, however, insist that written language and the symbol systems (e.g., mathematics) should remain an important vehicle for organizing, thinking abstractly, reasoning about future as well as present, and communicating some types of information more precisely. While mathematical ideas may best be apprehended holistically, the process of thinking through a problem in a step-by-step sequence to get it down on paper confers additional advantages, not the least of which is the ability to communicate the procedures to someone else. [16]

Since much nonverbal reasoning depends on visual imagery, many people wonder what more exposure to video will do to children's abilities to gain these "higher dimensions of human experience." Although I haven't heard anyone suggest that TV has improved kids' spiritual natures, one noted drama teacher told me she sees children of the video generation as better able to handle a "multiplicity of images, less stuck in narrative chronology." "The camera is a dreamer," she pointed out, that encourages their imaginations. [17] Other teachers say just the opposite. "They have lost the ability to visualize -- all their pictures have been created for them by someone else, and their thinking is limited as a result."

Curiously enough, however, visual stimulation is probably not the main access route to nonverbal reasoning. Body movements, the ability to touch, feel, manipulate, and build sensory awareness of relationships in the physical world, are its main foundations. A serious question now becomes whether children who lack spontaneous physical play and time to experiment with the world's original thought builders (e.g., sand, water, blocks, mom's measuring spoons, tree-climbing, rock-sorting, examining a seashell or the leaf of a maple tree, etc.) will be short-circuited in experimentation with nonverbal reasoning. Children who are rarely alone may well miss out on some important explorations with the "mind's eye." Frantic lifestyles do not lend themselves to imagination and reflection any more than aerobics classes for toddlers encourage manipulation of life's mysteries. Inept language usage is a serious problem, but inept insights might well be an even greater disaster.

Alphabets and Changing Brains

If (or as ... ?) we shift our major modes of communication from books to video, handwriting to computer word processors, what happens to the evolution of the brain? Such shifts, along with changes in the related patterns of thought, have both prehistoric and historic precedent. It is generally assumed that when humans learned to speak to each other, not only habits but brains changed. The development of written language is also believed to have had cognitive consequences -- or at least accompaniments. Not only does literacy, itself, change thinking, but the brain is apparently so sensitive to the input it learns to process that even different forms of the alphabet may have different effects.

The Western alphabet, in particular, has been linked to (or blamed for, as you will) our form of scientific thought and our system of formal logic. In The Alphabet Effect, Robert Logan points out that Eastern alphabets such as Chinese ideographs ("picture writing") and the more linear, alphabetic-phonetic patterns of the West show differences that he relates to "right-brained" and "left-brained" modes of thought. Logan suggests that while alphabetic systems cannot cause social changes, their usage encourages different types of cultural -- and perhaps neural -- patterns.

During the so-called Dark Ages in the West, when reading and writing diminished, many major advances in inventions and manual technologies took place. Logan implies that liberation from the written alphabet may have enabled relatively more progress in the fields of practical arts, mechanical and agricultural inventions, and the establishment of the framework of Western democracy in the Magna Carta. These, he suggests, are related to more holistic functions of the brain that were freed-up by lessened demands to process the printed word. [18]

After the invention of the printing press, academic learning was revived, and a new infatuation with the objective empiricism of the scientific method took hold. As we saw above, some now dare to question the enduring utility of this stage of the progression. Is it time for another change?

Certain specific features of alphabets may be responsible for differences in the way the brain processes them. Dr. Derrick de Kerckhove of the McLuhan program in Culture and Technology at the University of Toronto has presented evidence that Indo-European alphabets (like ours), in particular, "have promoted and reinforced reliance on left-hemisphere strategies for other aspects of psychological and social information processing." The relevant features include left-to-right progression of print, precise differentiation of vowel patterns, which tap left-hemisphere auditory areas; and linear, speech-like order of sounds. These forms may have a "reordering effect" on mental organization and even brain structure, suggests de Kerckhove. [19]

De Kerckhove, who works at the McLuhan Institute in Ontario, Canada, points out that our more abstract ways of thinking -- which, he believes, do not come "naturally" to the human brain -- were probably imposed, at least in part, by this particular system of writing. The exact rendering of the writer's language afforded by our alphabet (in contrast to more open-ended symbol systems such as pictorial scripts, which allow a wider range of personal interpretation of what was said) takes the reader away from his own associations and interpretations and enables him to reach into the more abstract logic behind the writer's thinking.

If such fine-grained differences between writing systems might be able to change thinking and even the related brain structures, it seems evident that a major shift in "the ratio of the senses" (in McLuhan's words), from print to visual processing, could have even more dramatic effects.

Some observers find this possibility troubling. If print literacies get trampled under the hooves of technological innovation, what will happen to our thinking? Will we lose precision of thought along with precision of expression? Will our ability to communicate outside a face-to-face context become limited? What will happen to the disciplined analytical and inductive thinking that serve creative intuition? [20] While purely verbal thinking may, indeed, be "sterile," it is doubtless an important adjunct to higher-level reasoning and creativity.

. . .while nonlinguistic symbol systems such as those of mathematics and art are sophisticated, they are extremely narrow. Language, in contrast, is a virtually unbounded symbol system. . . the prerequisite of culture. In sum, we do not always think in words, but we do little thinking without them. [21]


Dr. Diane Ravitch, noted scholar and educational theorist, is worried about current attitudes that imply "a longing to get away from language, as though we would all be more primitive, more spontaneous, and more joyful. Then we could read each other's body language rather than have to communicate through written devices.

"Enemies of print literacy," she admonishes, are all too ready to say, "Well, man, this is where it's happening, let's go with the flow." But blind faith that change inevitably implies progress is just as foolish as refusing to accept new ideas at all. Throwing out the precision of language would be particularly dangerous at a time when balance is badly needed. Print and visual literacies can and should complement each other; visual images open doors to new modes of understanding, but print is still necessary for thoughtful analysis. [22]

This argument will probably assume greater urgency as the computer age forces us toward more analytic precision at the same time it demands visualization of new technological applications. Tension between visual and verbal reasoning, in fact, is a major kernel of the information-age paradox. Our children will need both.

THE CHALLENGE: EXPANDING MINDS

Technology has not yet reached the point where it can guide our children's mental development -- if it ever will, or should. Nor can children, without good models, shape their own brains around the intellectual habits that can make comfortable companions either of machines or their own minds in a rapidly changing world. Adults in a society have a responsibility to children -- all children -- to impart the habits of mental discipline and the special skills refined through centuries of cultural evolution. It is foolish to send forth unshaped mentalities to grapple with the new without equipping them with what has proven itself to be worthwhile of the old.

A prudent society controls its own infatuation with "progress" when planning for its young. Unproven technologies and changing modes of living may offer lively visions, but they can also be detrimental to the development of the young plastic brain. The cerebral cortex is a wondrously well-buffered mechanism that can withstand a good bit of well-intentioned bungling. Yet there is a point at which fundamental neural substrates for reasoning may be jeopardized for children who lack proper physical, intellectual, or emotional nurturance. Childhood -- and the brain -- have their own imperatives. In development, missed opportunities may be difficult to recapture.

The growing brain is vulnerable to societal as well as personal neglect. The immediate effects of ecological folly and misdirected social planning are already swelling the rolls of physically endangered brains. The more subtle legacies of television and adult expediency are being manifested in an erosion of academic and personal development for children from all walks of life. Their needs press heavily on our visions of the future.

While "progress" must be judiciously assessed, new developments are both needed and inevitable. Parents and teachers will need to broaden, perhaps even redefine, traditional parameters of intelligence and learning, not simply because of the changing priorities of future technologies but also because of present realities. This book has depicted a growing crisis in academic learning, created in large part by an alienation of children's worlds -- and the mental habits engendered by them -- from the traditional culture of academia. Young brains have been modeled around skills maladaptive for learning. Merely lamenting this fact, however, does not alter the reality or rebuild the brains. Nor does choking our young with more didacticism make them learn to think.

Closing the gap between wayward synapses and intellectual imperatives will not be easy. It will certainly not be accomplished by low-level objectives, such as memorization of information, that can now be accomplished far more efficiently by even the least intelligent computer. Human brains are not only capable of acquiring knowledge, they also hold the potential for wisdom. But wisdom has its own curriculum: conversation, thought, imagination, empathy, reflection. Youth who lack these "basics," who cannot ponder what they have learned, are poorly equipped to become managers of the human enterprise in any era.

The final lesson of plasticity is that a human brain, given good foundations, can continue to adapt and expand for a lifetime. Its vast synaptic potential at birth can bend itself around what is important of the "old" and still have room for new skills demanded by a new century. A well-nourished mind, well-grounded in the precursors of wisdom as well as of knowledge, will continue to grow, learn, develop -- as long as it responds to the prickling of curiosity. Perhaps this quality, above all, is the one we should strive to preserve in all our children. With it, supported by language, thought, and imagination, minds of the future will shape themselves around new challenges -- whatever they may be. But if we continue to neglect either these foundations or the curiosity that sets them in motion, we will truly all be endangered.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:13 am

Notes

CHAPTER 1: "KID'S BRAINS MUST BE DIFFERENT ..."


1. Jackson, A., and D. Hornbeck. "Educating young adolescents." American Psychologist 44 (5), 1988, p. 831.

2. Fortune, November 7, 1988.

3. Lopez, J. "System failure." Wall Street Journal, March 31, 1989, p. R13.

4. Source of all SAT and GRE scores: The College Board, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.

5. Venezky, R., et al. The Subtle Danger. Center for the Assessment of Educational Progress, Educational Testing Service, January 1987.

6. New York Times, April 26, 1988.

7. Barrow, K., et al. "Achievement and the three R's: A synopsis of National Assessment findings in reading, writing, and mathematics." NAEP-SY-RWM- 50, 1982 (ED 223 658).

8. Munday, L. "Changing test scores." Phi Delta Kappan 50, 1979, pp. 670-71.

9. New York Times, March 28, 1988.

10. Lapointe, A. "Is there really a national literacy crisis?" Curriculum Review, September/October 1987.

11. Carroll, J. "The National Assessments in reading: Are we misreading the findings?" Phi Delta Kappan, February 1987.

12. Manna, A., and S. Misheff. "What teachers say about their own reading development." Journal of Reading, November 1987, pp. 160-68.

13. Cullinan, B. Children's Literature in the Reading Program. Newark, DE: IRA, 1987.

14. New York Times, January 2, 1989.

15. Shuchman, L. "Books on tape: the latest best-sellers in Tokyo." New York Times, September 10, 1988.

16. Kozol, J. Illiterate America. New York: NAL, 1986.

17. Reed, K. "Expectation vs. ability: Junior college reading skills." Journal of Reading, March 1989.

18. Hechinger, F. "About education." New York Times, March 16, 1988.

19. Rothman, R. "NAEP releases delayed report on reading test." Education Week, March 2, 1988.

20. New York Times, December 30, 1987.

21. Eurich, A. 'The reading abilities of college students-after fifty years." New York: New York Times Foundation, 1980 (ED 182 742).

22. Education Week, April 5, 1989, p. 1.

23. Stanford Achievement Test, Eighth Edition. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

24. Cannell, J. Nationally Normed Elementary Achievement Testing in America's Public Schools: How AU Fifty States Are Above the National Average. Daniels, WV: Friends of Education, 1987.

25. Education Week, April 20, 1988.

26. Valenti, J. "About historians who can't write." New York Times, December 11, 1987.

27. Woodward, A. "Stress on visuals weakens texts." Commentary, Education Week, March 9, 1988, p. 19

28. New York Times, April 26, 1987.

29. Flynn, J. R. "Massie IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure." Psychological Bulletin 101 (2), 1987, pp. 171-91.

30. Emanuelsson, I., and A. Svenson. "Does the level of intelligence decrease?" National Swedish Board of Education, Stockholm, 1985 (ED 262094).

31. Lynn, R., and S. Hampson. "The rise of national intelligence." Personality and Individual Differences 7 (1), pp. 23-32.

32. Parker, K. "Changes with age, year-of-birth cohort, age by year-of-birth cohort interaction, and standardization of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Tests." Human Development 29, 1986, pp. 209-22.

33. Franke, R. "A nation at risk? IQ and environment in the 20th century." Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., August 1986.

34. Flynn, ibid.

35. Flynn, J. R. "Sociobiology and IQ trends over time." Behavioral and Brain Sciences 9 (1), 1986, p. 192.

36. O'Rourke, S. Personal communication. September 1988.

37. Kirk-Alpern, P. Personal communication. September 1988.

38. Costa, A. Personal communication. June 1988.

39. Gulick, R. Personal communication. April 1988.

40. Brazelton, T. B. "First steps." The World, March/April 1989.

41. Luddington-Hoe, S. Personal communication. September 1989.

42. Coulter, D. Personal communication. February 1989.

CHAPTER 2: NEURAL PLASTICITY: NATURE'S DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD

1. Diamond, M. Enriching Heredity. New York: Free Press, 1988.

2. Diamond, M. "Enriching heredity." Address given at conference: The Education Summit. Fairfax, VA, 1988.

3. Diamond, M. Personal communication. June 1988.

4. Denenberg, V. H. "Animal models and plasticity." In Gallagher, J., and C. Ramey, eds., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987.

5. Lerner, R. On the Nature of Human Plasticity. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

6. Lerner, R. Personal communication.

7. Scott, J. P. "Critical periods in behavioral development." Science, 1972, p. 957.

8. Scheibel, Arnold. 'The rise of the human brain." Paper presented at symposium, "The Ever-Changing Brain." San Rafael, CA, August 1985.

9. Greenough, W. T., J. E. Black, and C. S. Wallace. "Experience and brain development." Child Development 58, 1987, pp. 555-67.

10. Greenough, W. T. Personal communication.

11. Bernstein, Jane Holmes. Personal communication. October 1988.

12. Bernstein, Jane Holmes. Neurological Development: Brain Maturation and Psychological Development. Unpublished manuscript.

13. Diamond, M. Personal communication. March 1989.

14. Krasnegor, N., D. Gray, and T. Thompson. Developmental Behavioral Pharmacology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986.

15. Elkington, John. The Poisoned Womb. New York: Viking Penguin, 1985.

16. Eskenazi, B. "Behavioral teratology: Toxic chemicals and the developing brain." Address given at 'The Ever-Changing Brain." San Rafael, CA, 1985.

17. Eskenazi, B. Personal communication. 1987.

18. Needleman, H. "Exposure to lead at low dose in early childhood and before birth." In Krasnegor, N., D. Gray, and T. Thompson, eds., Developmental Behavioral Pharmacology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986, p. 169.

19. Riley, E. P., and C. V. Vorhees. Handbook of Behavioral Teratology. New York: Plenum Press, 1986.

20. USA Today, August 29, 1988, p. 1.

21. Healy, J. M. "Birth defects of the mind." Parents, March 1989.

22. Eskenazi, B. Personal communication. August 1987.

23. Dr. med. H. Pomp: Ev. Bethesda-Krankenhaus GmbH. Personal communication. January 1987.

24. Erik Jansson, co-ordinator of the National Network to Prevent Birth Defects. Personal communication. 1987.

25. Lauder, J., and H. Krebs. "Critical periods and neurohumors." In Greenough, W. and J. Juraska, eds., Developmental Neuropsychobiology. San Diego: Academic Press, 1986.

26. Fride, E., and M. Weinstock. "Prenatal stress increases anxiety-related behavior and alters cerebral lateralization of dopamine activity." Life Sciences 42, 1988, pp. 1059-65.

27. Kelley-Buchanan, C. Peace of Mind During Pregnancy. New York: Facts on File, 1988.

28. Rapin, I. "Disorders of higher cerebral function in children: New investigative techniques." Bulletin of the Orton Society 31, 1981, pp. 47-63.

29. Gardner, H. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

30. Healy, J. Your Child's Growing Mind: A Guide to Learning and Brain Development from Birth to Adolescence. New York: Doubleday, 1987.

31. Luddington, S. "Infant developmental care." Address given at Symposium Medicus. Cleveland, OH, September 1988.

32. Smotherman, W. P. "Fetal learning in utero." Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology. Baltimore, 1984.

33. De Casper, T. "Do human fetuses eavesdrop in the womb?" Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology. Baltimore, 1984.

CHAPTER 3: MALLEABLE MINDS: ENVIRONMENT SHAPES INTELLIGENCE

1. Kaas, J. H., M. Merzenich, and H. Killackey. "The reorganization of somatosensory cortex following peripheral nerve damage in adult and developing mammals." Annual Review of Neuroscience 6, 1983, pp. 325-56.

2. Epstein, H. "Growth spurts during brain development: Implications fur educational policy and practice." In J. Chall and H. Mirsky, eds., Education and the Brain. Seventy-fifth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part 11). Chicago: NSSE, 1978.

3. Yakovlev, P., and A. Lecours. "The myelogenetic cycles of regional maturation of the brain." In A. Minkowski, ed., Regional Development of the Brain in Early Life. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1967.

4. Renner, M., and M. Rosenzweig. Enriched and Impoverished Environments: Effects on Brain and Behavior. New York: Springer Verlag, 1987, p. 13.

5. Globus, A., et al. "Effects of differential experience on dendritic spine counts in rat cerebral cortex." Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 82, 1972, pp. 175-81.

6. Greenough, W. T., Black, J. E., and C. S. Wallace. "Experience and brain development." Child Development 58, 1987, p. 547.

7. Diamond, M. Enriching Heredity. New York: The Free Press, 1988.

8. Diamond, M., et al. "On the brain of a scientist: Albert Einstein." Experimental Neurology 88, 1985, pp. 198-204.

9. Bernstein, Jane Holmes. Personal communication. October 1988.

10. Scheibel, A. Personal communication. August 1984.

11. Bornstein, M. H., ed. Sensitive Periods in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

12. Hirsch, H., and S. Tieman. "Perceptual development and experience-dependent changes in cat visual cortex." In Bornstein, M. H., ed., Sensitive Periods in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987, p. 70.

13. Bornstein, M. H. Op. cit.

14. Buchwald, J. S. "A comparison of plasticity in sensory and cognitive processing systems." In N. Gunzenhauser, ed., Infant Stimulation. Somerville, NJ: Johnson & Johnson, 1987, p. 9.

15. Ibid., p. 27.

16. Bornstein, M. H., ed. Op. cit., p. 169.

17. Edelman, G. M. Neural Darwinism. New York: Basic Books, 1987.

18. Ibid., p. 165.

CHAPTER 4: WHO'S TEACHING THE CHILDREN TO TALK?

1. Luria, A. "The role of speech in the formation of temporary connections and the regulation of behavior in the normal and oligophrenic child." In B. Simon and J. Simon, eds., Educational Psychology in the USSR. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968, p. 85.

2. Bruner, J. Actual Minds, P088ible Worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986, p. 8.

3. Hamilton, A. J. "Challenging verbal passivity." NEATE Leaflet 85 (1), 1986, p.22.

4. Gigioli, P., ed. Language and Social Context. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1972.

5. Postman, N. Amusing Ourselves to Death. New York: Elizabeth Sifton Viking, 1985, p. 112.

6. Geyer, G. "Words bounce blame." Cleveland Plain Dealer, September 17, 1988.

7. Wells, G. Language, Learning, and Education. Windsor, Berkshire, England: NFER-NELSON, 1985, pp. 102-3.

8. Schieffelin, B., and E. Ochs. "Language socialization." Annual Review of Anthropology 15, 1986, pp. 163-91.

9. Schieffelin, B. Personal communication. August 1988.

10. Olson, S., et al. "Mother-child interaction and children's speech progress: A longitudinal study of the first two years." Merrill Palmer Quarterly 32 (1), 1986, pp.1-20.

11. Rinders, J., and M. Horrobin. "To give an EDGE: A guide for new parents of children with Down Syndrome." Minneapolis: Colwell Industries, 1984.

12. Wells, G. Op. cit., p. 135.

13. Squire, J. The Dynamics of Language Learning. NCRE/ERIC, 1987.

14. Kuczaj, S. A. "On the nature of syntactic development." In Kuczaj, S. A., ed., Language Development (vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982.

15. Bohannon, J., and L. Stanowicz. "The issue of negative evidence: Adult responses to children's language errors. Developmental Psychology 24 (5), 1988.

16. Zigler, E., and M. Frank, eds. The Parental Leave Crisis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988.

17. Dumtschin, J. "Recognize lanuage development and delay in early childhood." Young Children, March 1988, p. 20.

18. Schieffelin, B. Personal communication. September 1988.

19. Wells, G., op. cit., p. 117.

20. Dunning, B. "Doesn't anybody here talk English any more?" Cleveland Plain Dealer, January 28, 1988.

21. Vail, P. Clear and Lively Writing. New York: Walker lit Co., 1981.

22. Vail, P. Smart Kids With School Problems. New York: NAL, 1989. 23. Pratt, A., and S. Brady. "Phonological awareness and reading disability." Journal of Educational Psychology 80 (3), 1988, pp. 319-23.

CHAPTER 5: SAGGING SYNTAX, SLOPPY SEMANTICS, AND FUZZY THINKING

1. Mandelbaum, D. G. Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture and Personality. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1958.

2. Whorf, B. Language, Thought and Reality. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1956.

3. Tyler, S. The Said and the Unsaid. New York: Academic Press, 1978.

4. Blount, B., and M. Sanches. Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Change. New York: Academic Press, 1977.

5. Luria, A. Language and Cognition. New York: Wiley, 1982.

6. Vocate, D. The Theory of A. R. Luria. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987, p. 29.

7. Premack, D. "Minds with and without language." In L. Weiskrantz, ed., Thought Without Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.

8. Cohen, M., and S. Grossberg. "Neural dynamics of speech and language coding." Human Neurobiology 5 (1), 1986, pp. 1-22.

9. Siegel, L., and E. Ryan. "Development of grammatical-sensitivity, phonological and short-term memory skills in normally achieving and learning disabled children." Developmental Psychology 24 (I), 1988, pp. 28-37.

10. Dennis, M. "Using language to parse the young damaged brain. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 9 (6), 1987, pp. 723-53.

11. "Students said to lack writing skills." New York Times, December 4, 1986.

12. Benbow, C. "Neuropsychological perspectives on mathematical talent." In L. Obler and D. Fine, eds., The Exceptional Brain. New York: Guilford Press, 1988.

13. Orr, E. W. Twice as Less. New York: Norton, 1987.

14. Miura, I., and Y. Okamoto. "Comparisons of US and Japanese first graders' cognitive representation of number and understanding of place value." Journal of Educational Psychology 81 (I), 1989, pp. 109-13.

15. Sachs, J., Bard, B., and M. Johnson. "Language learning with restricted input." Applied Psycholinguistics 2, 1981, pp. 33-54.

16. Newport, E. "Maturation and language acquisition: Contrasting conceptualizations of critical periods for learning." Address given at annual conference: Jean Piaget Society. Philadelphia, June 1988.

17. Kay, P. "Language evolution and speech style." In Blount, B., and M. Sanches, eds., Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Change. New York: Academic Press, 1977.

18. Vocate, D. Op. cit., p. 19.

19. Gleitman, L. "Biological preprogramming for language learning?" In S. Friedman, K. Klivingdon, and R. Peterson, eds., The Brain, Cognition, and Education. New York: Academic Press, 1986.

20. Baker: R. "Swine by design." New York Times, October 2, 1988.

21. "Sassy: Like, you know, for kids." New York Times, September 18, 1988.

CHAPTER 6: LANGUAGE CHANGES BRAINS

1. Readers who may wish more amplification of hemispheric research as it relates to children may consult: Best, C. Hemispheric Function and Collaboration in the Child. New York: Academic Press, 1985. Molfese, D., and S. Segalowitz. Brain Lateralization in Children: Developmental Implications. New York: Guilford Press, 1988.

2. Snow, C. "Relevance of the notion of a critical period to language acquisition." In M. H. Bornstein, ed., Sensitive Periods in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

3. Witelson, S. "Neurobiologic aspects of language in children." Child Development 58, 1988, pp. 653-88.

4. Dennis, M., and H. Whitaker. "Language acquisition following hemidecortication: Linguistic superiority of left over the right hemisphere." Brain and Language 3, 1976, pp. 404-33.

5. Curtiss, S. 'The special talent of grammar acquisition." In Obler, L., and D. Fine, eds., The Exceptional Brain. New York: Guilford Press, 1988.

6. Levine, S. "Hemispheric specialization and implications for the education of the hearing impaired." American Annals of the Deaf 131 (3), 1986, pp. 238-42.

7. Marcotte, A., and R. La Barba. 'The effects of linguistic experience on cerebral lateralization for speech production in normal hearing and deaf adolescents. Brain and Language 31, 1987, pp. 276-300.

8. Neville, H., et al. "Altered visual-evoked potentials in congenitally deaf adults." Brain Research 226, 1983, pp. 127-32.

9. Neville, H. Personal communication. March 1989.

10. Simonds, R., and A. Scheibel. "The postnatal development of the motor speech area: A preliminary study." Brain and Language. In press.

11. Scheibel, A. Personal communication. June 1989.

12. Almli, C. R., and S. Finger. "Neural insult and critical period concepts." In M. H. Bornstein, ed., Sensitive Periods in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

13. Witelson, S. Personal communication. November 1988.

CHAPTER 7: LEARNING DISABILITIES: NEURAL WIRING GOES TO SCHOOL

1. Ohio ACLD Newsletter. Spring 1988.

2. Wang, M. C. "Commentary." Education Week, May 4, 1988.

3. ACID Newsbriefs 24 (I), January 1989, p. 12.

4. McGuinness, D. "Attention deficit disorder: The emperor's clothes, animal farm and other fiction." In S. Fisher and R. P. Greenberg, eds., How Effective Are Somatic Treatments for Psychological Problems? New York: Erlbaum. In press.

5. Lyytinen, H. "Attentional problems in children: Review of psychophysiological findings relevant to explaining their nature." Paper given at Annual Meeting, International Neuropsychological Society. Lahti, Finland, July 1988.

6. Yang, L. L., et al. "Perinatal hypoxia and cognitive functioning in relation to behavioral development of children." Paper given at Annual Meeting, International Neuropsychological Society. Lahti, Finland, July 1988.

7. Eichlseder, W. 'Ten years' experience with 1,000 hyperactive children in a private practice." The American Academy of Pediatrics 76, 1985, pp. 176-84.

8. "Debate grows on classroom's 'Magic Pill: " Education Week, October 21, 1987.

9. McGuinness, D. When Children Don't Learn. New York: Basic Books, 1985.

10. Obler, L. K., and D. Fein, eds. The Exceptional Brain. New York: Guilford Press, 1988, p. 7.

11. Pennington, B. "Genotype and phenotype analysis of familial dyslexia." Address presented at the Annual Meeting of the Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

12. Vail, P. Smart Kids with School Problems. New York: Dutton, 1987.

13. Duffy, F., and N. Geshwind. Dyslexia. Boston: Little Brown, 1985.

14. Obler, L. K., and D. Fein, eds. Op. cit.

15. Geshwind,. N. "The brain of a learning disabled individual." Annals of Dyslexia 34, 1984.

16. Geshwind, N., and P. Behan. "Left-handedness: Association with immune disease, migraine, and developmental learning disorder." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 79, 1982, pp. 5097-5100.

17. Galaburda, A. Personal communication. November 1988.

18. Galaburda, A. "Ordinary and extraordinary brains: Nature, nurture, and dyslexia." Address presented at the Annual Meeting of the Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

19. Duane, D. D. "Dyslexia: pure and plus: A model behavioral syndrome." Address presented at the Annual Meeting of the Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

20. Rourke, B. "The syndrome of nonverbal learning disorders." The Clinical Neuropsychologist 2 (4), 1988, pp. 293-330.

21. Potchen, E. J. "Disorders of the language system including dyslexia and learning disabilities." Address presented at the Annual Meeting of the Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

CHAPTER 8: WHY CAN'T THEY PAY ATTENTION?

1. Aubin, M. Personal communication. October 1988.

2. Picton, T., et al. "Attention and the brain." In S. Friedman et al., The Brain, Cognition, and Education. New York: Academic Press, 1986.

3. Posner, M. "Attention and the control of cognition." In S. Friedman et al., op. cit.

4. Johnston, W., and V. Dark. "Selective attention." Annual Review of Psychology 37, 1986, pp. 43-75.

5. Ceci, S., ed. Handbook of Cognitive, Social, and Neuropsychological Aspects of Learning Disabilities, Vol. II. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

6. Whalen, C., and B. Henker. Hyperactive Children. New York: Academic Press, 1980.

7. Bigler, N., et al. "Educational perspectives on attention deficit disorder." Paper presented at the international ACLD Conference. Las Vegas, February 1988.

8. Whalen, C., and B. Henker. Hyperactive Children. New York: Academic Press, 1980.

9. Kirby, E., and L. Grimley. Understanding and Treating Attention Deficit Disorder. New York: Pergamon, 1986.

10. Pelham, W. "The combination of behavior therapy and methylphenidate in the treatment of attention deficit disorders: A therapy outcome study." In L. Bloomingdale, ed., Attention Deficit Disorder, Vol. 3. Oxford: Pergamon, 1988.

11. Silver, L. "The confusion relating to Ritalin." ACW Newsbriefs, September 1988.

12. McGuinness, D. When Children Don't Learn. New York: Basic Books, 1985, pp. 200-201.

13. Cohen, N. "Physiological concomitants of attention in hyperactive children." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University, 1970.

14. Barkley, R. "Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder." Address presented at symposium: The Many Faces of Intelligence. Washington, D.C., Kingsbury Center, September 1988.

15. Barkley, R. "An overview of attention deficit and related disorders in childhood and adolescence." Address presented at course: Neurodevelopment and Its Implications for Attention, Emotion, and Cognition: California Neuropsychology Services. Long Beach, CA, November 1988.

16. Jacobvitz, D., and L. Sroufe. 'The early caregiver-child relationship and attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity in kindergarten: A prospective study." Child Development 58, 1987, pp. 1496-1504.

17. Mattson, A., et al. "40 Hertz EEG activity in LD and normal children." Poster presentation, International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

18. Best, C. T:, ed. Hemispheric Function and Collaboration in the Child. New York: Academic Press, 1985.

19. Welsh, M., and B. Pennington. "Assessing frontal lobe functioning in children: Views from developmental psychology." Developmental Neuropsychology 4 (3), 1988, pp. 199-230.

20. Brody, J. "Widespread abuse of drugs by pregnant women is found." New York Times, August 30, 1988.

21. Education Week, June 1, 1988.

22. "Get the lead out of your water." PTA Today, February 1988.

23. New York Times, April 12, 1989, p. 1.

24. Hartman, D. Neuropsychological Toxicology. New York: Pergamon, 1988.

25. Flax, E. "Pesticides in schools: Focus shifting from indifference to concern." Education Week, April 20, 1988.

26. "In California district, chemicals are used as last resort." Education Week, April 20, 1988.

27. Levine, A., and D. Krahn. "Food and behavior." In Morley, J., et al., eds., Nutritional Modulation of Neural Functioning. New York: Academic Press, 1988.

28. Wurtman, R., and J. Wurtman. Nutrition and the Brain, vols. 4, 6, and 7. New York: Raven, 1979, 1983, 1986.

29. Winick, M. Nutrition in Health and Disease. New York: Wiley, 1980.

30. Winick, M. Malnutrition and Brain Development. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.

31. Kane, P. Food Makes the Difference. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1985.

32. Chollar, S. "Food for thought." Psychology Today, April 1988, pp. 30-34.

33. Conners, K. Feeding the Brain: How Foods Affect Children. New York: Plenum Press, 1989.

34. Conners, K. "The phenomenology and neurophysiology of attention: Foods, drugs and attention in children." Address presented at course: Neurodevelopment and Its Implications for Attention, Emotion, and Cognition: California Neuropsychology Services. Long Beach, CA, November 1988.

35. Wurtman, R., and E. Ritter-Walker. Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function. Boston: Birkhauser, 1988.

36. Nation's School Report 14 (2), 1988.

37. "Army softens basic training." Cleveland Plain Dealer, April 17, 1989, p. 1.

38. Allen, G. "Why we need to improve youth fitness." PTA Today, February 1987.

39. Nation's School Report 14 (2), 1988.

40. Miller, N., and L. Melamed. "Neuropsychological correlates of academic achievement." Poster presentation, International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

41. Phillips, S. "The toddler and the preschooler." Unit for Child Studies, Selected Papers no. 29, New South Wales University, 1984 (ED 250 097).

42. Ayres, A. J. Sensory Integration and Learning Disorders. Los Angeles Western Psychological Services, 1972.

43. Ayres, A. J. "Improving academic scores through integration." Journal of Learning Disabilities 11, 1978, pp. 242-45.

44. Weikart, P. Round the Circle: Key Experiences in Movement. Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press, 1986.

45. Weilcart, P. Personal communication. November 1988.

46. Mills, J. "Noise and children." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 58 (4), 1975, p. 776.

47. Deutsch, D., ed. The Psychology of Music. New York: Academic Press, 1982.

48. Breitling, D., et al. "Auditory perception of music measured by brain electrical activity mapping." Neuropsychologia 25 (5), 1987, pp. 765-74.

49. Pareles, J. "What'd they say? Awop-bop a loo-bop." New York Times, August 8, 1988.

50. Pareles, J. "New-age music booms softly." New York Times, November 29, 1988.

51. Zentall, S., and T. Zentall. "Optimal stimulation: A model of disordered activity and performance in normal and deviant children." Psychological Bulletin 94 (3), 1983, pp. 446-71.

52. Luddington-Hoe, S. "Infant development and care." Symposium sponsored by Symposia Medicus. Cleveland, November 1988.

53. Levy, J. Personal communication. November 1988.

54. Schreckenberg, G., and H. Bird. "Neural plasticity of MUS musculus in response to disharmonic sound." Bulletin of the New Jersey Academy of Sciences 32, 1987, pp. 77-86.

CHAPTER 9: THE STARVING EXECUTIVE

1. Posner, M., and F. Friedrich. "Attention and the control of cognition." In Klivington et al., eds., The Brain, Cognition, and Education. New York: Academic Press, 1986, p. 100.

2. DenckIa, M. Personal communication. September 1988.

3. Snyder, V. "Use of self-monitoring of attention with LD students: Research and application." Learning Disability Quarterly 10 (2), 1987, pp. 139-51.

4. Palfrey et al. 'The emergence of attention deficits in early childhood: A prospective study." Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 6 (6), 1986, pp. 339- 348.

5. Lambert, N. "Adolescent outcomes for hyperactive children." American Psychologist 43 (10), 1988, pp. 786-99.

6. Pollard, S., et al. "The effects of parent training and Ritalin on the parent-child interactions of hyperactive boys." Family and Behavior Therapy 5 (4), 1983, pp. 51-69.

7. Barkley, R. "What is the role of parent group training in the treatment of ADD children? Journal of Children in Contemporary Society 19 (1, 2), 1986, pp. 143-51.

8. Rapport, M. "Ritalin vs. response cost in the control of hyperactive children: A within-subject comparison." Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 15 (2), 1982, pp. 205-16.

9. Wells, K. "What do we know about the use and effects of behavior therapies in the treatment of ADD?" Journal of Children in Contemporary Society 19 (1, 2), 1986, pp. 111-22.

10. Patemite, C., and J. Loney. "Childhood hyperkinesis and home environment." In C. Whalen and B. Henker, 005., Hyperactive Children. New York: Academic Press, 1980.

11. Campbell, W., et al. "Correlates and predictors of hyperactivity and aggression." Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 14 (2), 1986, pp. 217-34.

12. Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-Behavior Modification: An Integrative Approach. New York: Plenum, 1977.

13. Vocate, D. R. The Theory of A. R. Luria. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987, p. 136.

14. Vygotsky, L. Thought and Language. A. Kozulin, ed. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.

15. Ibid., p. 228.

16. Waters, H., and V. Tinsley. "The development of verbal self-regulation." In Kuczai, S., ed., Language Development, Vol. 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1982.

17. Ibid.

18. Duckworth, E. "Understanding children's understandings." Paper presented at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Toronto, 1981, pp. 51-52.

19. Cazden, C. Classroom Discourse. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heineman, 1988, p. 102.

20. Bruner, J. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.

21. Rakic, P., and P. Goldman-Rakic. Development and modifiability of the cerebral cortex." Neurosciences Research Program Bulletin 20 (4), 1982.

22. Noava, O., and A. Ardilla. "Linguistic abilities in patients with prefrontal damage." Brain and Language 30, 1987, pp. 206-25.

23. Goldman-Rakic, P: "Development of cortical circuitry and cognitive function." Child Development 58, pp. 601-22.

24. Becker, M., Isaac, W., and G. Hynd. "Neuropsychological development of nonverbal behaviors attributed to frontal lobe functioning." Developmental Neuropsychology 3 (3, 4), 1987, pp. 275-98.

25. Welsh, M., and B. Pennington. "Assessing frontal-lobe functioning in children." Developmental Neuropsychology 4 (3), 1988, pp. 199-230.

26. Friedman, S., K. Klivington, and R. Peterson. The Brain, Cognition, and Education. New York: Academic Press, 1986.

27. Klivington, K. Personal communication. August 1988.

CHAPTER 10: TV, VIDEO GAMES, AND THE GROWING BRAIN

1. e.g., Palmer, E. Television and American Children: A Crisis of Neglect. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Greenfield, P. Mind and Media. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

2. Fox, N., and M. Fanyo. "Turn off the television and turn on reading." Reading Today, April/May 1988, p. 11.

3. Winick, M., and J. Wehrenberg. Children and TV Two. Washington: ACEI, 1982.

4. Walberg, H., and T. Shanahan. "High school effects on individual students." Educational Researcher 12 (7), 1983, pp. 4-9.

5. Winn, M. Unplugging the Plug-In Drug. New York: Penguin, 1987.

6. Liebert, R., and J. Sprafkin. The Early Window. New York: Pergamon, 1988.

7. Languis, M., and M. Wittrock. "Integrating neuropsychological and cognitive research: A perspective for bridging the brain-behavior relationship." In J. Obrzut and G. Hynd, eds., Child Neuropsychology, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1986.

8. Anderson, D., and P. Collins. The impact on children's education: Television's influence on cognitive development. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, April 1988, p. 34.

9. Anderson, D. Personal communication. March 1989.

10. Singer, J. Personal communication. March 1989.

11. Beentjes, J., and T. Van der Voort. "Television's impact on children's reading skills: A review of research." Reading Research Quarterly 23 (4), 1988, pp. 389-413.

12. Goleman, D. "Infants under 2 seem to learn from TV." New York Times, November 22, 1988.

13. Liebert, R. and J. Sprafkin. The Early Window. New York: Pergamon, 1988.

14. Reeves, B., et al. "Attention to television: Intrastimulus effects of movement and scene changes on alpha variation over time." International Journal of Neuroscience 27, 1985, pp. 241-55.

15. Moody, K. Growing Up on Television. New York: Times Books, 1980.

16. Mander, J. Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television. New York: Morrow Quill, 1978.

17. Emery, F., and M. Emery. A Choice of Futures: To Enlighten or Inform? Canberra: Center for Continuing Education, Australian National University, 1975.

18. Anderson, D., and P. Collins. Op. cit., p. 52.

19. Reeves, B. Personal communication. March 1989.

20. Bryant, J. Personal communication. March 1989.

21. Anderson, D. '''The influence of television on children's attentional abilities." Paper commissioned by Children's Television Workshop, University of Massachusetts, 1985.

22. Anderson, D., and •P. Collins. Op. cit., p. 34.

23. Ibid., p. 65.

24. Krugman, H. "Brain wave measures of media involvement." Journal of Advertising Research 2 (1), 1971, pp. 3-9.

25. Emery, M., and F. Emery. "The vacuous vision: The TV medium." Journal of University Film Association 32 (1, 2), 1980, pp. 27-31.

26. Mulholand, T. "Objective EEG methods for studying covert shifts in visual attention." In F. J. McGuigan and R. Schoonover, eds., The Psychophysiology of Thinking. New York: Academic Press, 1973.

27. Featherman, G., et al. Electroencephalographic and Electrooculographic Correlates of Television Viewing. Final Technical Report: National Science Foundation Student-Oriented Studies. Amherst: Hampshire College, 1979.

28. Walker, J. "Changes in EEG rhythms during television viewing." Perceptual and Motor Skills 51, 1980, pp. 255-61.

29. Radlick, M. "The processing demands of television." Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Troy, NY: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1980.

30. Burns, J., and D. Anderson. "Cognition and watching television." In D. Tupper and K. Cicerone, eds., Neuropsychology of Everyday Life. Boston: Kluwer, in press.

31. Yosawitz, A. Personal communication. February 1989.

32. Turkle, S. The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984.

33. Bracy, O., et al. "Cognitive Retaining Through Computers: Fact or Fad? Cognitive Rehabilitation, March 1985, pp. 10-23.

34. Siegel, L. Personal communication, February 1989.

35. Harter, R. Personal communication. March 1989.

36. Singer, J. '''The power and limitations of television: A cognitive-affective analysis." In P. Tannenbaum, ed., The Entertainment Functional of Television. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1980, p. 61.

37. Winn, M. The Plug-In Drug. New York: Viking Press, 1977, pp. 42, 47.

38. Emery, M., and F. Emery. '''The vacuous vision: The TV medium." Journal of the University Film Association 32 (1, 2), 1980, p. 30.

39. See, e.g., S. Weinstein et al., "Brain-activity responses to magazine and television advertising." Journal of Advertising Research 20 (3), 1980, pp. 57-63.

40. Springer, S., and G. Deutsch. Left Brain, Right Brain, revised edition. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1985.

41. Kirk, U. Neuropsychology of Language, Reading, and Spelling. New York: Academic Press, 1983.

42. Calvert et al. '''The relation between selective attention to television forms and cl1iIdren's comprehension of content." Child Development 53, 1982, pp. 601-10.

43. de Kerckhove, D. "Critical brain processes." In D. de Kerckhove and C. Lumsden, eds., The Alphabet and the Brain. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1988, p. 417.

44. Ibid. General Introduction.

45. Maehara, K., et al. "Handedness in the Japanese." Developmental Neuropsychology 4 (2), 1988, pp. 117-27.

46. Springer, S., and G. Deutsch. Left Brain, Right Brain, revised edition. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1985.

47. Neville, H., et al. "ERP studies of cerebral specialization during reading." Brain and Language 16, 1982, pp. 316-37.

48. Bakker, D., and J. Vinke. "Effects of hemisphere-specific stimulation on brain activity and reading in dyslexics." Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 7 (5), 1985, pp. 505-25.

49. Bakker, D. '''The brain as a dependent variable." Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology 6 (I), 1984, pp. 1-16.

50. Bakker, D., and S. Glaude. "Prediction and prevention of L- and P-type dyslexia." Poster Session, Annual Meeting: International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

51. Heller, W. Personal communication. April 1989.

52. Best, C. Hemispheric Function and Collaboration in the Child. New York: Academic Press, 1985.

53. Witelson, S., and D. Kigar. "Anatomical development of the corpus callosum in humans." In D. Molfese and S. Segalowitz, eds., Brain Lateralization in Children: Developmental Implications. New York: Guilford Press, 1988.

54. Levy, J. "Single-mindedness in the asymmetric brain." In Best, op. cit., p. 27.

55. Levy, J. Personal communication. November 1989.

56. Segalowitz, S. Personal communication. February 1989.

57. Welsh, M., and K. Cuneo. "Perseveration in young children." Poster session, Annual Meeting: International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

CHAPTER 11: SESAME STREET AND THE DEATH OF READING

1. Katz, L. Engaging Children's Minds. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1989.

2. Katz, L. "Engaging children's minds." Address presented at Annual Meeting, National Association of Independent Schools. Chicago, March 1989.

3. Sesame Street. Morning edition, National Public Radio, December 1988.

4. Kaufman, F., vice president for public affairs, Children's Television Workshop. Personal communication. March 1989.

5. Education Week, June 15, 1988, p. 5.

6. Mielke, K., vice president for research, Children's Television Workshop. Personal communication. March, 1989.

7. Benbow, M. "Development of handwriting." Lecture presented at Smith College Day School. Northampton, MA, October 1989.

8. Healy, J. Your Child's Growing Mind. New York: Doubleday, 1989.

9. Beck, I., and P. Carpenter. "Cognitive approaches to word reading." American Psychologist 41 (10), 1986, pp. 1098-1105.

10. Beck, I., and P. Carpenter. "Cognitive approaches to understanding reading." American Psychologist 41 (10), 1986, pp. 1098-1105.

11. Lundberg, I., and T. Hoien. "Case studies of reading development among normal and disabled readers in Scandinavia." Paper presented at 39th Annual Conference, Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

12. Rice, M., and P. Haight. "'Motherese' of Mr. Rogers: A description of the dialogue of educational television programs." Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 51, 1986, pp. 282-87.

13. Jensen, J., and D. Neff. "Differential maturation of auditory abilities in preschool children." Paper presented Annual Meeting: International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

14. Jensen, J. Personal communication. February 1989.

15. Wood, K., and L. Richman. "Developmental trends within memory-deficient reading-disability subtypes." Developmental Neuropsychology 4 (4), 1988, pp. 261-74.

16. Rice, M., and L. Woodsmall. "Lessons from television." Child Development (in press).

17. Singer, J. ''The power and limitations of television: A cognitive-affective analysis." In P. Tannenbaum, ed., The Entertainment Functions of Television. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1980.

18. Rice, M., et al. Words from Sesame Street: Learning Vocabulary while Viewing. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, in press.

19. Cook, T., et al. Sesame Street Revisited. New York: Russell Sage, 1975.

20. Aulls, M. "Research into practice." Reading Today, February 3, 1988, p. 6.

21. Postman, N. Amusing Ourselves to Death. New York: Elizabeth Sifton/Viking, 1985.

22. Statement of instructional goals for the twentieth experimental season of Sesame Street (1988-89).

23. Meringoff, L. "Influence of the medium on children's story apprehension." Journal of Educational Psychology 72, 1980, pp. 240-49.

24. Tamis-LeMonda, C., and M. Bornstein. "Is there a 'sensitive period' in human mental development?" In M. Bornstein, ed., Sensitive Periods in Development. Hillsdale: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

25. Halpern, W. "Turned-on toddlers." Journal of Communication, Autumn 1975, pp. 66-70.

26. Singer, J., ibid., p. 55.

27. Singer, ibid., p. 54.

28. Ibid., p. 55.

29. Bums, J., and D. Anderson. "Cognition and watching television." In D. Tupper and K. Cicerone, eds., Neuropsychology of Everyday Life. Boston: Kluwer, in press.

30. Pressley, M., et al. "Short term memory, verbal competence, and age as predictors of imagery instructional effectiveness." Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 43, 1987, pp. 194-211.

31. Greenfield, P., et al. "Is the medium the message?" Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 7, 1986, pp. 201-18.

32. Sesame Street. Morning edition, National Public Radio, December 1988.

CHAPTER 12: "DISADVANTAGED" BRAINS

1. Lerner, R., and K. Hood. "Plasticity in development: Concepts and issues for intervention." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 7, 1986, pp. 139-52.

2. Education Week, February 22, 1989, p. 15.

3. Winick, M., et al. "Malnutrition and environmental enrichment by early adoption." Science 190, 1975, pp. 1173-86.

4. Hechinger, F. "A better start." Address given at Annual Meeting, National Association of Independent Schools. New York, February 1988.

5. Brooks, A. "Children of fast-track parents." Address given at Annual Meeting, National Association of Independent Schools. New York, February 1988.

6. Brooks, A. Children of Fast-Track Parents, New York: Viking, 1989.

7. Brooks, A. Personal communication. March 1989.

8. New York Times, December 26, 1988.

9. Brislin, R. W. "Human diversity: Race, culture, class, and ethnicity." G. Stanley Hall Address presented at Annual Meeting, American Psychological Association. New York, August 1987.

10. Cazden, C. Classroom Discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1988.

11. Havighurst, R. 'The relative importance of social class and ethnicity in human development." Human Development 19, 1976, pp. 56-64.

12. Graham, S. "Can attribution theory tell us something about motivation in blacks?" Educational Psychologist 23 (1), 1988, pp. 3-21.

13. Largo, R., et al. "Language development of term and preterm children during the first five years of life." Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 28, 1986, pp. 333-50.

14. Gunarsa, S., et al. "Cognitive development of children." Symposium: Preparation for Adulthood, Third Asian Workshop on Child and Adolescent Development. Malaysia, 1984.

15. Reeves, S. "Self-interest and the common weal: Focusing on the bottom half." Education Week, April 27, 1988.

16. Wells, G. Language, Learning, and Education. Philadelphia: NFER-NELSON" 1985.

17. Thanks to Dr. Elyse Fleming for her suggestion of this term.

18. Schorr, L., and D. Schorr. Within Our Reach. New York: Anchor/Doubleday, 1988.

19: Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition. "Contributions of cross-cultural research to educational practice." American Psychologist, October 1986, p. 1053.

20. McCall, R. "Developmental function, individual differences, and the plasticity of intelligence." In J. Gallagher and C. Ramey, 005., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987, p. 33.

21. Pogrow, S. "Teaching thinking to at-risk elementary students." Educational Leadership, April 1988, p. 80.

22. Coles, R. The Call of Stories: Teaching and the Moral Imagination. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1989.

23. Whimbey, A., and J. Lockheed. Problem Soloing and Comprehension. Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute, 1982.

24. Smith, J., and J. Caplan. "Cultural differences in cognitive style development." Developmental Psychology 24 (I), 1988, pp. 46-52.

25. Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, op. cit., p. 1053.

26. Alvarez, G. "Effects of material deprivation on neurological functioning." Social Science and Medicine 17 (16), 1983, pp. 1097-1105.

27. Blount, B., and M. Sanches. Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Change. New York: Academic Press, 1977.

28. Siegel, L. "Home environmental influences of cognitive development in preterm and full-term children during the first five years." In A. Gottfried, ed., Home Environment and Early Cognitive Development. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 1984.

29. Norman-Jackson, E. "Family interactions, language development and primary reading achievement of black children in families of low income." Child Development 53, 1982, pp. 349-58.

30. Cazden, C., op. cit.

31. Hemphill, L. "Context and conversational style. " Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, UMI no. 86-20, 1986, p. 703.

32. Cazden, C., op. cit., p. 192.

33. Bruner, J. Actual Minds, Possible worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.

34. Heath, S. "What no bedtime story means: Narrative skills at home and school." Language in Society 11, 1982, pp. 49-76.

35. Whitehurst, G., et al. '''The effects of parent questions on children's reading abilities." Developmental Psychology 24, 1988, pp. 552-59.

36. Alvarez, G., op. cit., pp. 1099, 1102.

37. Flashman, L., and I. Knopf. '''The relationship between sustained attention and short-term memory in kindergarten children." Poster session, Annual Meeting, International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

38. Geffner, D., and I. Hochberg. "Ear laterality performance of children from low and middle socioeconomic levels on a verbal dichotic listening task." Cortex 7, 1971, pp. 193-203.

39. Borowy, R., and R. Goebel. "Cerebral lateralization of speech: The effects of age, sex, race, and social class." Neuropsychologia 14, 1976, pp. 363-70.

40. Barwick, M., L. Siegel, and J. Van Duzer. '''The nature of reading disability in an adult population." Poster session, Annual Meeting, International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

41. Waber, D., et al. "SES-related aspects of neuropsychological performance." Child Development 55, 1984, pp. 1878-86.

42. Waber, D. 'The biological boundaries of cognitive styles: A neuropsychological analysis." In T. Globerson and T. Zelniker, eds., Cognitive Style and Cognitive Development. New York: Ablex, in press.

43. Springer, S., and G. Deutsch. Left Brain, Right Brain. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1981, p. 142.

44. Springer, S., and G. Deutsch. Left Brain, Right Brain, 2nd edition. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1985, p. 242.

45. Scott, S., et al. "Cerebral speech lateralization in the Native American Navajo." Neuropsychologia 17, 1979, pp. 89-92.

46. Rogers, L., et al. "Hemispheric specialization of language: An EEG study of bilingual Hopi Indian children." International Journal of Neuroscience 8, 1977, pp. 1-6.

47. McKeever, L., et al. "Language dominance in Navajo children: Importance of the language context." Poster session, Annual Meeting, International Neuropsychological Society. Vancouver, BC, February 1989.

48. Becker, M., et. al. "Neuropsychological development of nonverbal behaviors attributed to 'frontal lobe' functioning," Developmental Neuropsychology 3 (4), 1987, pp. 275-98.

49. Waber, D. Personal communication. March 1989.

50. Angoff, W. "The nature-nurture debate, aptitudes, and group differences." American Psychologist 43 (9), 1988, p. 713.

51. Scarr, S., and R. Weinberg. "IQ test performance of black children adopted by white families." American Psychologist 31, 1976, pp. 726-39.

52. Scarr, S., and J. Arnett. "Malleability: Lessons from intervention and family studies," In J. Gallagher and C. Ramey, eds., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987, pp. 78-9.

53. Duyme, M. "School and social class: An adoption study." Developmental Psychology 24 (2), 1988, pp. 203-9.

54. Scarr, S., and R. Weinberg. 'The influence of "family background" on intellectual attainment." American Sociological Review 43, 1978, pp. 674-92.

55. Diamond, M. Enriching Heredity. New York: Free Press, 1988, p. 96.

56. Kiyono, S., et al. "Facilitative effects of maternal environmental enrichment on maze learning in rat offspring." Physiology & Behavior 34, 1985, pp. 431-35.

57. Scarr, S., and J. Arnett, op cit., p. 74.

58. Schorr, L., and D. Schorr, op. cit.

59. Scholnick, E. "Influences on plasticity: Problems of definition." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 7, 1986, pp. 131-38.

60. Manrique, B. Personal communication. June 1988.

61. Manrique, B. Personal communication. June 1988.

62. Caldwell, B. "Sustaining intervention effects," In Gallagher, J., and C. Ramey, eds., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987, p. 91.

63. Rothman, R. "A district ties goals to success," Education Week, March 22, 1989.

64. Bracey, G. "Advocates of basic skills 'know what ain't so,'" Education Week, April 5, 1989.

65. Zigler, E., and J. Freedman. "Early experience, malleability, and Head Start," In J. Gallagher and C. Ramey, eds., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987, p. 91.

CHAPTER 13: NEW BRAINS: NEW SCHOOLS?

1. Costa, A. "The school as home for the mind." Address delivered at Education Summit Conference. Fairfax, VA, June 1988.

2. Costa, A. Personal communication. June 1988.

3. White, Merry. The Japanese Educational Challenge. New York: The Free Press, 1987.

4. Kohn, A. No Contest: The Case Against Competition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986.

5. "Teachers complain of lack of parental support." New York Times, December 12, 1988.

6. Comer, J. Issues '88. Washington: National Education Association, 1988.

7. White, B. "Helping children actualize their potential." Human Intelligence Newsletter 9 (3), 1988, pp. 3-5.

8. Bartolome, Paz. "The changing family and early childhood education." In Changing Family Lifestyles. Washington: ACEI, 1982, p. 11.

9. Pratt, M., et al. "Mothers and fathers teaching 3-year-olds." .Developmental Psychology 24 (6), 1988, pp. 832-39.

10. McGuinness, D. "Reading failure: Causes and cures." Paper presented at Annual Meeting, Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

11. Lindamood, P. Personal communication. November 1988.

12. Blachman, B. Discussant, Symposium on Phonological Processes in Literacy. Annual Meeting, Orton Dyslexia Society. Tampa, FL, November 1988.

13. Winn, D. "Develop listening skills as a part of the curriculum." The Reading Teacher, November 1988, pp. 144-46.

14. Cazden, C. Classroom Discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1988.

15. Hamilton, A. J. "Challenging verbal passivity." NEATE Leaflet 85 (1), 1986, p. 22.

16. Taxonomy of questions adapted from B. Bloom et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay, 1956.

17. Goodman, K. What's Whole in Whole Language? Exeter, NH: Heinemann, 1986.

18. Calkins, L. The Art of Teaching Writing. Exeter, NH: Heinemann, 1986.

19. Newman, J. Whole Language: Theory in Use. Exeter, NH: Heinemann, 1985.

20. Altwerger, B., et al. "Whole Language: What's New?" The Reading Teacher, November 1987.

21. Harman, S., and C. Edelsky. 'The risks of whole language literacy: Alienation and connection." Language Arts 66 (4), 1989, pp. 392-406.

22. Heath, S., "Questioning at home and at school." In G. Spindler, ed., Doing the Ethnography of Schooling. New York: Holt, Rinehart, &: Winston, 1982.

23. Tharp, R. "Psychocultural variables and constants." American Psychologist 44 (2), 1989, pp. 349-59.

24. "Peer mediation: When students agree not to disagree." Education Week, May 25, 1988.

25. "Schoolyard diplomacy." Children, June. 1988.

26. Barbieri, E. "Talents unlimited." Educational Leadership, April 1988, p. 35.

CHAPTER 14: TEACHING THE NEW GENERATION TO THINK: HUMAN AND COMPUTER MODELS AT SCHOOL AND AT HOME

1. Wilson, M. "Critical thinking: Repackaging or revolution?" Language Arts 65 (6), 1988, pp. 543-51.

2. Perkins, D. "Mindware: The new science of learnable intelligence." Address delivered at Education Summit Conference. Fairfax, VA, June 1988.

3. Wiggins, G. "10 'radical' suggestions for school reform." Education Week, March 9, 1988, p. 28.

4. Education Week, October 19, 1988, p. 5.

5. Eisner, E. "The ecology of school improvement." Educational Leadership, February 1988, pp. 24-29.

6. Resnick, L. "On learning research." Educational Leadership, December 1988, p. 12.

7. Kiewra, B. "Verbal control processes and working memory." Educational Psychologist, Winter 1988, p. 42.

8. Feuerstein, R. "Mediated learning: An open system." Address delivered at Education Summit Conference. Fairfax, VA, June 1988.

9. Ibid.

10. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987.

11. Kett, J. Personal communication. October 1988.

12. New York Times, "Education Life," April 9, 1989.

13. Palmer, E. Television and America's Children: A Crisis of Neglect. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

14. Ibid., p. xxii.

15. Greenfield, P. Mind and Media. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

16. Posner, M. Personal communication. August 1988.

17. Herron, J. Personal communication. April 1989.

18. Schwartz, J. "Closing the gap between education and the schools," In M. A. White, ed., What Curriculum for the Information Age? Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987, p. 70.

19. Weizenbaum, J. Computer Power and Human Reason. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1976.

20. Boden, M. Artificial intelligence and Natural Man. New York: Basic Books, 1987.

21. Rutkowsa, J., and C. Crook. Computers, Cognition, and Development. New York: John Wiley, 1987.

22. Forbes, August 27, 1984, p. 156.

23. Katz, L. Personal communication. March 1989.

24. Frith, U. Autism:, Explaining the Enigma. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989.

CHAPTER 15: EXPANDING MINDS

1. Ogbu, J. "Cultural influences on plasticity in human development," In J. Gallagher and C. Ramey, eds., The Malleability of Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1987, p. 159.

2. Gould, S. J. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: Norton, 1981, p. 325. 3. Ibid., p. 331.

4. Gould, S. J. Ever Since Darwin. New York: Norton, 1977, p. 45.

5. Potts, R. Quoted in U.S. News and World Report, January 27, 1989, p. 59.

6. Bruner, J. Personal communication. September 15, 1988.

7. Education for a Democratic Future. Committee on Correspondence on the Future of Public Education, New York, 1984.

8. Technology and the American Tradition. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1988.

9. Vail, P. Personal communication. June 1988.

10. White, M. A. "The third learning revolution." Electronic Learning, January 1988, p. 6.

11. Schwartz, J. "Closing the gap between education and the schools." In M. A. White, ed., What Curriculum for the Information Age? Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.

12. Zukav, G. The Dancing Wu Li Masters. New York: Bantam Books, 1979.

13. John-Steiner, V. Notebooks of the Mind. New York: Harper &: Row, 1985.

14. Ferguson, E. "The mind's eye: Nonverbal thought in technology." Science 197 (4306), 1977, pp. 827-36.

15. Grubb, R. Personal communication. June 1988.

16. Weiskrantz, L. Thought Without Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.

17. O'Neill, C. Personal communication. October 1988.

18. Logan, R. The Alphabet Effect. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1986.

19. de Kerckhove, D: "Critical brain processes involved in deciphering the Greek alphabet." In D. de Kerckhove and C. Lumsden, eds., The Alphabet and the Brain. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1987, pp. 416-17.

20. John-Steiner, V. Op. cit.

21. Hunt, M. The Universe Within. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1982, p. 315.

22. Ravitch, D. "Technology and the curriculum." In White, M. A., ed., What Curriculum for the Information Age? Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:22 am

Index

abortion, spontaneous, 59
abuse, child, 236
ACT (American College Testing
Program), 17
active learning, 71-73, 297-300
ADHD, see attention deficit with
or without hyperactivity disorder
adopted children, 262-64
Age of Reason, 87
air pollution, 164, 238
alcohol, fetal brain development
and, 60, 163-64
aliteracy, 23
Allen, George, 169
allergic (autoimmune) disease,
147
allergies, 166
AU the King's Men (Warren), 25
alphabet, 212, 223-26, 342-45
Alphabet and the Brain, The (de
Kerckhove), 212
Alphabet Effect, The (Logan), 343
alpha waves, 173, 203-4, 231
aluminum, 60, 164
Alvarez, Gonzalo, 253, 256-57
amblyopia, 76-77
American Academy of Pediatrics,
168
American College Testing Pro-
gram (ACT), 17
American Federation of Teachers,
20
American Psychological Association,
243
367
American Sign Language (ASL),
115
Amusing Ourselves to Death
(Postman), 87
Anderson, Daniel, 197-98, 200,
202-3, 204
Anderson, John, 169
Angoff, William H., 262
Animal Farm (Orwell), 98
animals:
brain of human beings vs., 53-
54, 149
music and, 175 .
antisocial behavior, 154, 158, 250,
306
Army, U.S., 168-69
arsenic, 60, 164
artificial intelligence, 322r-23
ASL (American Sign Language),
115
aspartame (NutraSweet), 166,
167-68, 169
Association for Children with
Learning Disabilities, 61
Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development,
42, 153
attention deficit with or without
hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD), 13~1, 149, 153,
177, 186, 192, 250
antisocial behavior and, 154,
158
categories of, 154
cognitive therapy for, 156
attention deficit with or without
hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD) (cont.)
definition of, 139-40
diagnosis of, 155
dyslexia and, 146
emotional factors in, 156
environment and heredity and,
158-59, 178, 192
hyperactivity and, 139-41, 154,
157
learning disabilities and, 139-
141, 149
motivational control of, 157-58
rule-governed behavior and,
157-58
statistics on, 140, 179
attention spans, 13-15, 41-42,
137, 151-92, 302-3, 313
attention systems in, 159-62
brain development and, 138,
159-62
diet and, 162, 165-68
involuntary vs. voluntary, 231
learning and, 154
parental attention and, 177-82
reward systems and, 158-59
television and, 42, 153, 199,
215, 216, 228, 231
auditory cortex, 75
autoimmune (allergic) disease,
147
automatic codes, 125
autoplasticity, 314
axons, 51, 66
Ayres, Jean, 171

back-to-basics movements, 279
Baker, Russell, 120
Bakker, Dirk, 212-13
Barkley, Russell, 157-58
basal readers, 36, 298, 300
beat, internal sense of, 171-72
behavioral teratology, 59
Bernstein, Jane Holmes, 57-58,
73, 79-81
beta waves, 173
birds, neural development of, 149
birth defects, 58-59
birthweight, low, 162
blacks:
class and, 244-46
improved SAT scores of, 18
underclass as stereotype for,
244
whites' adoption of, 263
blood-brain barrier, 163, 164, 167
body language, 109, 125, 344
books:
textbooks, 36-37, 116
trade, 298
Bowers, Reveta, 241
Boyer, Ernest, 320
Bracey, Gerald W., 273
brain, 47-82
alcohol and, 50, 163-64
alphabet and, 212, 342-45
alpha waves of, 173, 2034, 231
animal vs. human, 53-54, 149
beta waves of, 173
blood barrier of, 163, 164, 167
cells of, 51
changing nature of, 13, 45-46,
49, 52, 55, 278
computers vs., 222-23, 321-29,
331
corpus callosum of, 125, 159,
213-14
cortex of, see cortex
damage to, recovering from, 53,
131
of disadvantaged children, 237-
240, 256-58
drugs and, 50, 163-64
emotional deprivation and, 239-
240
environment and, 47-82, 261
evolution of, 333-35
experience-dependent systems
of, 54, 68-69
experience-expectant systems
of, 54, 89, 108
first year in development of,
44, 93
future demands on, 331-46
glial cells of, 51, 56, 66, 71, 73
hearing problems and, 88, 130-
131, 212
"holes" in, 63
individuality of, 58, 141-43,
149, 150 .
internal competition in, 78-79,
127
language and, 86, 106-7, 123-
134
language deprivation and, 86
left hemisphere of, see left
hemisphere of brain
limbic system of, 160-61, 239
motor-speech area of, 131
myelination of, 66-67, 69, 70
neocortex of, 56
neural plasticity of, 47-65, 67,
346
neurons of, see neurons
nutrition and, 165-68, 238
oxygen deprivation of, 163
physical development of, 56
physical fitness and, 170-72
prefrontal development of,
162, 184, 18~90, 191, 215,
260
prenatal stimulation of, 64-65
P300 wave of, 77
of rats, 47-48, 70-72, 264-65
reading and, 211-12, 214, 215-
216, 261
removing one hemisphere of,
128
right hemisphere of, see right
hemisphere of brain
screening out stimulation of,
174
stress and, 62, 167, 174, 238
stroke and, 53
television and, 199, 200-204,
208-17
timing and, 73-78, 265-66
toxic exposure and, 58, 5~1,
62, 138, 162, 164-65, 238
uncommitted tissue of, 53-54
in verbal vs. nonverbal skills,
20, 40
visual system of, 75, 76, 130
weight of, 66
writing and, 211-12, 214, 215-
216, 261, 342-45
Brain, Cognition, and Education,
The (Friedman, Klivington,
and Peterson), 191
Brazelton, T. Barry, 43
breakfast, 167
breast milk, 61
Brislin, Richard, 243, 244, 245,
246
Brooks, Andree, 240-41
Bruner, Jerome, 85, 89, 188, 254,
334-35
Bryant, Jennings, 201-2
Buchwald, Jennifer, 77
bureaucratese, 120

cadmium, 60
California Achievement Test, 28
Call of Stories, The (Coles), 249
Cannell, James, 28, 29
carbohydrates, 166
caretakers, 43-44, 240-41
inadequate learning environments
created by, 240
low pay and low skill of, 241
see also day care
Carnegie Council on Adolescent
Development, 16
cataracts, 77
cats, 75, 76, 79-80
Cazden, Courtney, 186, 243-44,
293
Chelsea (hearing-impaired
woman), 130
chemical fertilizers, 60
children:
abused, 236
adopted, 262-64
caretakers for, 240-41
disadvantaged, see disadvantaged
children
divorce and, 282, 284
of single parents, 284
wild, 129-30
Children of Fast-Track Parents
(Brooks), 240
Children's Television Workshop,
202, 221, 222, 233
chimpanzees, 107
China, People's Republic of, 140
Chinese ideographs, 343
Chopin, Frederic, 174
cigarettes, 58
Classroom Discourse (Cazden),
243
Clear and Lively Writing (Vail),
102 Cliff Notes, 22
closed class (function) words,
118-19, 126, 129, 132
Coalition of Essential Schools, 311
cocaine, 50, 164
codeine, 60
codes:
automatic, 125
elaborated, 117-19, 121, 133
restricted, 116-19
switching of, 120-22
cognitive therapy, 156
Coles, Robert, 249
collaborative learning techniques,
283
College Board, 17
Comer, James, 284-85
Committee on Correspondence on
the Future of Public Education,
335
computer hackers, 21)7
computers, 22, 40, 45, 50, 308-29
brain vs., 222-23, 321-29, 331
as educational tool, 322, 324-
329, 335-37
learning abilities promoted by,
337-38
mediated learning and, 315
nonverbal thinking and, 341
talking to, 324-25
transfer and, 327
writing on, 325-26
zone of proximal development
and, 326-27
conflict resolution, 306-7
connective thinking, 312
Conners, Keith, 166-67, 168
content (open class) words, 118-
119
contextualized instruction, 305,
312
conversation, mealtime, 252
corporations:
middle management in, 279
remedial courses offered by, 16,
86
corpus callosum, 125, 159, 213-
214
cortex, 56, 70, 75, 128
frontal lobes of, 161, 184, 18~
190, 191, 203, 215, 260
cosmetic curriculum, 67
Costa, Arthur, 42, 279
Coulter, Dee, 44, 335
Council for Basic Education, 36
Countryman, Joan, 112
Country of the Pointed Firs, The
(Jewett), 25
critical thinking, 124, 133, 257-
259, 309, 317, 31~21)
Croxton, James, 164
Cullinan, Bernice, 23
cultural evolution, 333-35
cultural literacy, 318-19
Cultural Literacy: What Every
American Needs to Know
(Hirsch), 318
culture, language and, 86-88, 89
curriculum:
cosmetic, 67
rewriting of, 312
zero-based, 273
see also schools; teaching
Curtiss, Susan, 120-30

Dancing Wu Li Masters, The
(Zukav), 340
Darling-Hammond, Linda, 27
Darwin, Charles, 333
Darwin III (computer), 78
day care, 235-37, 239
availability of, 43
language skills in, 94-95
quality of, 44
socioeconomic mix in, 235-37
see also caretakers
deafness, 88, 130, 212
"Debate Grows on Classroom's
'Magic Pill,'" 141
defects, birth, 58-59
de Kerckhove, Derrick, 212, 343
delinquency, 154, 158, 250, 306
Denckla, Martha Bridge, 177-78
dendrites, 71, 76
environmental enrichment and,
131
function of, 51-52, 66
Denenberg, Victor H., 49
deprivation:
emotional, 239-40
of oxygen, 163
Deutsch, Georg, 259
Diamond, Marian, 47-49, 71, 72
Einstein's brain studied by, 73
on environmental enrichment,
48-49, 70, 264
rats' brain studied by: 47-48,
70, 264
on uniqueness of brain, 58
dichotomania, 213
disabilities, learning, see learning
disabilities
disadvantaged children, 235-74
brain of, 237-40, 256-68
definition of, 237
problem-solving abilities of,
248-51, 255-56
in school, 247-57, 304-7
divorce, 282, 284 .
"Doesn't Anybody Here Talk English
Any More?" (Dunning),
102
Down's syndrome, 91
dropout rates, 268
drugs:
brain damage and, 50, 163-64
hyperactivity and, 140-41, 154,
155-57
learning disabilities and, 138,
140-41, 154, 155-57
Duckworth, Eleanor, 185
Dunning, Brian, 102
dyes, food, 166
dysgraphia, 223
dyslexia, 145-48, 149, 192, 303

economics, GRE scoring gains in,
20
Eddy, Kristin, 25
Edelman, Gerald, 78-79
education:
intrauterine, 265
in Japan vs. U.S., 280-81
see also learning; schools; teaching
Educational Testing Service, 18,
262
Education Week, 36, 141
eggs, 167
egocentric speech, 184
Einstein, Albert, 73
Eisner, Eliot, 312-13
elaborated codes, 117-19, 121, 133
Electric Company, 201-2
Elementary School Center, 282
embedded information, 108
Emery, Fred, 203, 210
Emery, Merrelyn, 203, 210
emotional deprivation, 239-40
Engaging Children's Minds
(Katz), 220
engineering, GRE scoring gains
in, 20
English literature:
GRE scores declining in, 19
teachers' dislike of, 22-23
Enriching Heredity (Diamond),
48, 264
environment:
ADHD and, 158-59, 178, 192
brain and, 47-82, 261
enrichment of, 48-49, 70, 131,
264
heredity vs., 48, 49-51, 138,
145-50, 262-64
IQ tests and, 38, 39, 40, 50,
253
learning disabilities and, 50,
138, 145-50
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), 164
Epstein, Herman, 69
Eskenazi, Brenda, 59, 61
evolution:
cultural, 333-35
of language, 87
examinations, see tests
Exceptional Brain, The (Obler
and Fine), 145
exercise, 170
experience-dependent systems,
54, 68-69
experience-expectant systems, 54,
89, 108

facial expression, 109
Fairleigh Dickinson University,
175
family size, 38-39
Family Ties, 319
FAX machines, 332
Feeding the Brain (Conners), 166
fertilizers, chemical, 60
fetus:
alcohol and, 50, 163-64
artificial stimulation of, 64-65
music and, 174
toxins and, 58, 59-61, 162, 163
Feuerstein, Reuven, 314-15
Fine, Deborah, 145
Finland, 140
Flynn, James R., 39, 40
food, 165-68
additives in, 165, 166
allergies to, 166
dyes in, 166
junk, 162, 165-68
Food Makes the Difference
(Kane), 166
forced learning, 67-69, 242-43
foreign-born students, 19, 20, 21
foreign languages, 114
GRE scores declining in, 19
language development and, 241
learning of, 77-78, 124
Fortune, 16
Frames of Mind (Gardner), 64
France, 101
Freire, Paolo, 223
Friedrich, Frances, 177
function (closed• class) words,
118-19, 126, 129, 132
Futrell, Mary Hatwood, 284, 285

Galaburda, Albert, 146-48
Gardner, Howard, 64, 338
genetic engineering, 296
Genie (wild child), 129, 130
Germany, Federal Republic of
(West), 61, 140
Geshwind, Norman, 146-47
gesturing and prompting, 78
Gettysburg address, 87-88
Geyer, Georgie Anne, 88
glial cells, 51, 56, 66, 71, 73
global village, 45
Gould, Steven Jay, 333-34
Graduate Record Examinations
(GRE):
foreign-born students and, 19,
20
nature of, 18-19
scoring trends of, 18-20
Graham, Sandra, 244-45
grammar, see syntax
Great Britain, 101
Greenfield, Patricia, 320, 321
Greenough, William T., 54-55,
71, 72, 172
Grubb, Ralph, 341
Gulick, Rosemary, 42-43

hackers, computer, 207
Hamilton, A. Jane, 86
Harter, M. Russell, 208, 209
headphones, 81, 87, 103, 172,
175
Head Start, 265
hearing problems:
brain and, 130-31, 212
language skills and, 77, 114-15
math skills and, 112
heart disease, 168
Heath, Shirley Brice, 255-56, 304
Hechinger, Fred M., 25, 240
Heller, Wendy, 213
heredity, environment vs., 48,
49-51, 138, 145-50, 262-64
heroin, 60
Herron, Jeannine, 322
Hirsch, E. D., 318, 319
history, GRE scores declining in,
19
holistic thinking, 124, 125, 133,
257-59, 340
homelessness, 235, 236, 237, 238
Hopi, 259
How to Have a Smarter Baby
(Luddington-Hoe), 65
Hyperactive Children (Barkley),
157
hyperactivity, 139, 140-41, 154,
155-57, 178, 296
see also attention deficit with or
without hyperactivity disorder
hyperlexics, 26

IBM, 337, 341
illiteracy, 22, 212
infants, premature, 238, 245-46
information, embedded, 108
inner speech, 182-86, 190, 192,
314
instruction, see education; teaching
intelligence:
artificial, 322-23
language and, 106-7
see also IQ scores and tests
internal sense of beat, 171-72
International Reading Association,
227
intrauterine education, 265
intuition, 125
Inuits, 106
IQ scores and tests, 13, 37-40,
42, 103, 190
of adopted children, 263
of chimpanzees, 107
environmental factors in, 38,
39, 40, 50, 253
with half of brain removed, 128
increased difficulty of, 38
lead and, 59-60
nutrition and, 38
prefrontal development and,
162
uncertainty of, 38, 39
verbal vs. nonverbal sections of,
37-38
iron deficiency, 165, 167

Japan:
educational philosophy of U.S.
vs., 280-81
newspaper readership in, 24
publishing industry of, 24
Japanese language:
left and right hemisphere functions
in, 212
numbers in, 113-14
Jensen, Janet, 225
Jewett, Sarah Orne, 25
Johnny Tremaine (Forbes), 299
Jones, Anna, 287
junk food, 162, 165-68

Kamehameha Early Education
Program (KEEP), 305-6
Kaspar (wild child), 129, 130
Katz, Lillian, 220, 233, 319, 328
Kay, Paul, 117, 119-20
KEEP (Kamehameha Early Education
Program), 305-6
Kennedy Institute Neurobehavioral
Clinic, 177
Kett, Joseph, 318
kinesthetic (muscular) stimulation,
78
Kinsbourne, Marcel, 213
kittens, 75, 76, 79-80
Klivington, Kenneth. A., 51, 191
Korea, Republic of (South), 238

language, 85-134
body, 109, 125, 326, 344
brain and, 86, 106-7, 123-34
bureaucratic use of, 120
contemporary changes in, 119
culture and, 86-88, 89
in day-care and school, 94-97
deprivation of, 86
developing skills in, 54-55, 76-
78, 88-98, 129-31, 241, 283
disabilities in, 102, 109
evolution of, 87
foreign, see foreign languages
hearing problems and, 77, 114-
115
inner speech and, 182-86, 190,
192, 314
intelligence and, 106-7
listening skills and, 96, 101-4,
121, 143-44, 286-95
language (cont.)
music as model for, 103, 174
Native American, 259-60
parental teaching of, 77-78,
89-94, 103-4, 114-15, 131,
162, 183-86, 188, 286
physical effects of, 106-7, 123-
124
primitive, 116-17, 119-2O
separating words from pictures
in, 91-92, 133, 144
sign, 88
socioeconomics and, 119, 253-
256
syntax and, see syntax
teachers as models for, 95, 96-
97, 132
teenagers' code-switching and,
120-22
television as model for, 88, 94,
114, 115, 210, 225-26
thinking and, 97-99
Language Arts, 321
Lapointe, Archie E., 110
lazy eye, 76-77
lead, toxic effects of, 59-60, 164,
167, 238, 261
learned helplessness, 187
Learners' Model Technology
Project, 330
learning, 81
active, 71-73, 297-300
attention span and, 154
collaborative techniques of,
283
computers and, 322, 324-29,
335-38
forced, 67-69, 242-43
of foreign languages, 77-78, 124
listening skills and, 143-44
mediated, 314-15
passive, 73, 80, 95, 187, 199,
201-3, 230-31, 297, 298-99
receptive, 202
Sesame Street and, 221, 222-24
of syntax, 107-9, 288-90
visual imagery and, 232
see also education; schools;
teaching
learning disabilities, 137-50, 186
ADHD and, 139-41, 149
definition of, 141
diagnoses of, 139
drug treatment of, 138, 140-41,
154, 155-57
environment and heredity and,
50, 138, 145-50
hyperactivity and, 139, 140
individuality of, 141-43
language and, 102, 109
as middle-class phenomenon,
139, 140
nonverbal, 148-49
overstimulation and, 175
physical therapy for, 171
sedentary lifestyles and, 138
toxic exposure and, 59, 62, 138
Left Brain, Right Brain (Springer
and Deutsch), 259
left-handedness, 147
left hemisphere of brain, 123-34
critical thinking and, 124, 133,
257-59
dyslexia and, 146
function words and, 118, 126
hearing impairment and, 130
learning disabilities and, 160
musical appreciation by, 126,
173
Native American language use
of, 260
phonological awareness and,
103, 126
reading skills and, 127, 133,
210
right hemisphere interacting
with, 125, 126, 128, 132-34,
159, 160, 174, 209, 213-14,
215, 216
syntax and, 109, 110, 124, 126-
134
television's neglect of, 110, 127,
209, 210-11, 215, 216
of wild children, 129-30
Leiden University, 198
Lerner, Richard M., 52, 235
Levy, Jerre, 175, 214, 233
lifestyles, sedentary, 138
limbic system, 160-61, 239
Lindamood, Patricia, 287
listening skills:
importance of, 96
integrating other language skills
with, 297, 300-302
language problems and, 96,
101-4, 121, 143-44, 286-95
parental teaching of, 292
television and, 121, 144, 153,
228-29
literacy, 22, 112
cultural, 318-19
visual, 320, 321, 339-40
literature, see English literature
Logan, Robert, 343
LOGO, 327
lower class, 244, 246
Luddington-Hoe, Susan, 43-44,
65, 174-75
Lundberg, Ingvar, 224-25
Luria, Alexander, 85, 106-7, 117,
182-83, 190

Macbeth (Shakespeare), 232
McCall, Robert B., 248
McGuinness, Diane, 156-57
McKeever, Walter, 259-60
McLanguage, 102, 110
McLuhan, Marshall, 344
McMahon, Audrey, 61
MacNeil, Robert, 228
MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour, 228
magazines, increasing numbers of,
24
magic square, 189
Magna Carta, 343
magnetic resonance imaging, 149
malnutrition, 165, 238
manganese, 164
Manrique, Beatriz, 267
marijuana, 60, 164
math, 96
brain functions required by, 20,
125, 127, 148
declining skills in, 15, 16, 20,
21, 188
grammatical problems and, 110,
112-14
and internal sense of beat, 171-
172
nonverbal thinking in, 107, 250,
342
scoring trends in, 18, 19-20
visual imagery and, 232
Matthew (homeless child), 236
mealtime conversation, 252
mediated learning, 314-15
memorizing, 290
memory:
short-term auditory, 143
working, 231
mental retardation:
aspartame and, 167
lead and, 59
synaptic connections and, 75
mercury, 60, 164
metacognition, 313-15
metalinguistic awareness, 227
methadone, 60 .
methyl mercury, 60
Mexico, 164
mice, 175
Michelle (student), 289
middle class, 139, 140
milk, breast, 61
Mind and Media (Greenfield), 320
mindware, 311
"Missouri New Parents as Teachers
Project (NPAT)," 285-86
Mister Rogers' Neighborhood,
225, 231
monkeys, 68, 76
mothers, 265
gesturing and prompting by, 78
teenage, 237
working, 43, 94, 95, 240
see also parents
motor cortex, 161
motor-speech area of brain, 131
Motorola, 16
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus, 174
muscular (kinesthetic) stimulation,
78
music, 172-76
animal studies and, 175
fetal response to, 174
as language model, 103, 174
music (cont.)
left and right hemisphere
functions and, 103, 125,
126, 173
videos of, 196, 340
myelin, 66-67, 69, 70

Naropa Institute, 335
National Academy of Sciences,
312
National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP), 17,
20, 21, 22, 25-26, 110, 188
National Council for Teachers of
English, 321
National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics, 153
Native American languages, 259-
260
nature-nurture question, see environment;
heredity
Navaho, 259-60, 305-6
Needleman, Herbert L., 60
neocortex, 56
Netherlands, 39
Neural Darwinism (Edelman), 78
neural plasticity of brain, 47-65,
67, 346
advantages and disadvantages
of, 55-56
definition of, 49, 50
studies of, 47-48, 49
neuromodulators, 52, 158
neuromotor development, 68
neurons, 51-52, 53, 63, 71, 127
dyslexia and, 146-48
excess numbers of, 57, 66, 74,
78
experience-expectant, 54
function of, 51-52
negative networks of, 69
prenatal migration of, 56, 59
structure of, 51
neurotransmitters, 52, 158
Neville, Helen, 130-31
Newport, Elissa, 115
newspapers:
numbers and readership of, 24
television news vs., 23
New York Times, 26, 164, 174,
240, 319
Niger, 321
"Nintendo, " 207
noise pollution, 173
nonverbal skills, 107, 250, 341-42
disorders with, 148-49
verbal skills vs., 20, 40
North Point Press, 24
numbers:
place value of, 113-14
see also math
nursery rhymes, 93
NutraSweet (aspartame), 166,
167-68, 169
nutrition, 266, 282
brain chemistry and, 165-68,
238
IQ and, 38
myelin and, 70
in pregnancy, 62, 63

obesity, 168
Obler, Lorraine, 145
Ogbu, John U., 330
On the Nature of Human Plasticity
(Lerner), 52
open class (content) words, 118-
119
oral tradition, 290
Orland, Martin, 246
O'Rourke, Shirley, 40-41
Orr, Eleanor Wilson, 113
oxygen deprivation, 163

Palmer, Edward, 320
Pareles, Jon, 174
parents:
attention spans and, 177-82
attitude of, 246, 266-67
caretakers as substitutes for,
240-41
connective thinking taught by,
312
language skills taught by, 77-
78, 89-94, 103-4, 114-15,
131, 162, 183-86, 188, 286
listening skills taught by, 292
mediated learning and, 314-15
overly ambitious demands of,
242-43
problem-solving abilities taught
by, 248-51, 255-56
reluctant self-assertion of, 45
schools and, '284-86
single, 284
see also mothers
Parent-Teacher Association (PTA),
164
passive learning, 73, 80, 95, 187,
199, 201-3, 230-31, 297,
298-99
passive voice, 108, 128
Paul (day-care child), 236-37
Paul, Diana, 37
PBBs, 60
PCBs, 60
Pennington, Bruce, 145, 190
perceptual defense, 229
perceptual-motor skills, 208
perceptual organization, 229
Perkins, David, 311
pesticides, 60, 61, 164-65
Peterson, Gary, 330
philosophy, GRE eliminated for,
19
phoneme segregation, 288
phonics, 25, 27, 127, 133, 228,
287-88
phonological awareness, 103, 126,
258, 287-88
physical abuse, 236
physical fitness, 168-72
physical therapy, 171
pictures, separating words from,
91-92, 133, 144
"Pig Latin, " 287
PKU, 167
placenta, 58, 62
Pogrow, Stanley, 248-49
political science, GRE scores declining
in, 19
pollution:
air, 238
noise, 173
Pope, Alexander, 49
Posner, Michael, 177, 321
Postman, Neil, 87, 228
Potchen, E. James, 149-50
poverty, 237, 238 .
prefrontal development of brain,
162, 184, 189-90, 191, 215,
260
pregnancy, 59-65
drug use in, 60
fetal brain artificially stimulated
in, 64-65
fetal exposure to toxins in, 58,
59-61, 162, 163
nutrition in, 62, 63
stress in, 62, 238
teenage, 237
Premack, David, 107
premature infants, 238, 245-46
prenatal care and stimulation, 38
"Prenatal University, " 65
preschoolers, reading and, 222-
223
Presidential Fitness Test, 168 .
President's Council on Physical
Fitness and Sports, 169
primitive languages, 116-17, 119-
120
print, 87
problem-solving models, 248-51,
255-56
processing, sequential and parallel,
322-23
prompting and gesturing, 78
protein, 167, 239
proximal development, zone of
(ZPD), 186, 190, 191, 326-
327
psychology, GRE ~ring gains in,
20
PTA (Parent-Teacher Association),
164
P300 wave, 77
publishing industry, 24

questioning, 295-96

race, 243, 244-45, 263
radio, 233
RAND, 27
Rapin, Isabelle, 63
ratio of senses, 344
rats:
Diamond's studies of, 47-48,
70-72, 264-65
maternal improvement study of,
265
stress study of, 62
Ravitch, Diane, 344
Reading Rainbow, 221
Reading Research Quarterly, 198
reading skills, 20-37
active learning of, 297-300
alphabet recognition and, 223-
226
brain and, 211-12, 214, 215-16,
261
decline of, 20, 21-26, 188
dumbing-down tests for, 27-29
dyslexia and, 145-46, 303
faulty testing of, 26-29, 36
integrating other language skills
with, 297, 300-302
and internal sense of beat, 171-
172
left-hemisphere deficiency and,
127, 133, 210
metalinguistic awareness and,
226
preschoolers and, 222-23
Sesame Street and, 221, 222-34
television and, 198-99, 203,
208-9, 221, 222-34
test samples for, 30-35
textbooks and, 36-37, 116
reasoning, see thinking
receptive learning, 202
Reeves, Byron, 200
relational thinking, 124, 125, 133,
251, 257-59, ~, 305-6
remedial courses, 16, 86, 2137
Renner, Michael, 71
restricted codes, 116-19
retardation, mental, see mental
retardation
reward systems, 158-59
Rhine River, 61
rhymes, nursery, 93
right hemisphere of brain, 123-
134, 212, 316, 317
dyslexia and, 146-47
holistic thinking and, 124, 125,
133, 257-59, 340
left hemisphere interacting
with, 125, 126, 1213, 132-34,
159, 160, 174, 209, 213-14,
215, 216
musical appreciation and, 103,
125, 173
Native American languages and,
259-60
nonverbal learning disorders
and, 148-49
syntax and, 109, 124-25, 1213-
129
television and, 210-11, 215,
216
video games and, 125, 127
of wild children, 129-30'
Ritalin, 140-41, 155-57, 170, 179
Rivera, Lourdes, 235-37, 241
"Roadville, " 255-56
Romagnano, Lew, 331
Roseanne, 319
Rosenzweig, Mark, 70-71
Round the Circle: Key Experiences
in Movement (Weikart),
171
rule-governed behavior, 157-58

Salt Institute, 130, 191
SAT, see Scholastic Aptitude Test
Scandinavia, 224
Scarr, Sandra, 263-64, 265
Scheibel, Arnold, 74, 131
Schieffelin, Bambi, 90-91, 95-96
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT),
17-18, 39
bias criticisms of, 17
declining scores on, 17-18
improved minority scores on,
18
Scholnick, Ellin, 265
schools, 277-307
administrators of, 29
cultural responsibility of, 277-
278, 320
disadvantaged children in, 247-
257, 304-7
language in, 94-97
parents and, 284-86
schedule of, 282, 321
socioeconomics and, 268-72
structural changes suggested
for, 282, 321
see also teachers; teaching
Schorr, Lisbeth B., 247, 265
Schwartz, Judah, 324, 339
science, 96
declining skills in, 15, 16, 20,
188
grammatical problems and,
110
and rewriting curriculum, 312
visual imagery and, 232
secondary repertoires, 79
sedentary lifestyles, 138
Segalowitz, Sid, 215
senses, ratio of, 344
sensorimotor-perceptual skills,
170
Sensory Integration Therapy, 171
sensory skills, 76-78
sentence structure, 116-19
Sesame Street, 201, 202, 208, 217,
218-34, 288, 319
cultural messages of, 233
and declining reading and
learning skills, 221, 222-34
false message of, 220-21, 226
good television symbolized by,
219-20
incomprehensibility of, 230-31
lack of research on, 221-22,
234
as language model, 94, 114,
225-26
listening skills ignored by, 228-
229
manipulative format of, 200,
202, 218-19, 220, 225, 226,
228
number of viewers of, 221
passive learning and, 80, 230-
231
production cost of, 221
sensory overloading on, 229-
230
slapstick humor of, 233
socioeconomics and, 220, 225,
226
viewing habits institutionalized
by, 196, 220
see also television
Shakespeare, William, 340
Shanker, Albert, 20-21
Shedlin, Allan, 282
Shoemaker, Jack, 24
short-term auditory memory, 143
Siegel, Linda, 208
sign language, 88
Silas Marner (Eliot), 249
Simonds, Roderick, 131
Singer, Jerome, 198, 209, 230,
231
single parents, 284
Smart Kids with School Problems
(Vail), 102
Snow, Catherine, 91
socioeconomics:
academic achievement and,
235-37, 243-47, 257, 263-64,
268
differing values and, 244, 245
drug use and, 164
growing gulf in, 220, 226
IQ tests and, 50
language and, 119, 253-56
of learning disabilities, 139, 140
problems found at every level
of, 101, 179, 239, 240, 249,
252-53, 272
race vs., 244-45
school quality and, 268-72
status (SEC) and, 244, 245-46
teachers' understanding of, 244,
254, 305
of television viewing, 196, 238,
252, 321
sociology, GRE scores declining
in, 19
soft drinks, 166, 167, 168
solvents, 60
Soviet, Union, 170
"Space Invaders," 206
speech:
egocentric, 184
inner, 182-86, 190, 192, 314
spelling:
computer tutoring and, 326
hearing problems and, 77
left hemisphere and, 125, 146,
148, 210
listening skills and, 102
visualization and, 126-27
Spinelli, Nico, 77
spontaneous abortion, 59
Springer, Sally, 259
Stanford Achievement Test, 28
starches, 166
stimulation:
excessive, 175, 229-30
muscular, 78
prenatal, 64-65
screening of, 174
see also television
storytelling, 93, 104, 255, 256
stress, 62, 167, 174, 238
stroke victims, 53
sugar, 165, 166, 167, 266
superbabies, 242, 286
synapses, 51-52, 75, 76, 77, 86
brain power and, 52
definition of, 47
enriched conditions and, 71
"firming up" of, 53, 69, 74
increasing size of, 47
and internal competition in
brain, 79, 127
remodeling of, 242-43, 262-
265
syntax, 105-22
elaborated codes and, 117-19,
121, 133
function of, 88, 288
learning of, 107-9, 288-90
left and right hemisphere handling
of, 109, 110, 124-26,
128-34
mathematics and, 110, 112-14
restricted codes and, 116-19
simple, 117, 121
thinking and, 105-7, 110

tachistoscope, 258
taikyo, 265
"Talents Unlimited, " 307
teachers:
as language models, 95, 96-97,
132
mediated learning and, 315
qualities needed by, 283-84
remedial training needed by,
287
socioeconomic differences and,
244, 254, 305
subjects disliked by, 22
on worsening abilities, 14-15,
21-22, 40-43, 99-102, 111-
112, 137, 151, 227, 268-69,
316-17
see also education; schools
teaching:
as anachronism, 312
collaborative learning techniques
of, 283
computers and, 322, 324-29,
335-38
contextualized instruction and,
305, 312
group discussions and, 292
increased knowledge of, 16-17
to manipulate test scores, 29,
36, 268, 269-71, 273, 278
suggested changes in, 283-307
of thinking, 308-18
whole language movement and,
see whole language movement
see also education; learning;
schools; teachers
"Technology and the American
Transition," 337-38
teenagers:
code-switching by, 120-22
as mothers, 237
television, 42, 55, 73, 74, 90, 99,
127, 131, 195-217, 266, 319
attention spans and, 42, 153,
199, 215, 216, 228, 231
brain and, 199, 200-204, 208-
217
cognitive consequences of, 198-188
critical thinking and, 320
dysgraphia and, 223
foreign language experiment
with, 114
IQ tests and, 40
lack of research on, 195, 196-98
as language model, 88, 94, 114,
115, 210, 225-26
left hemisphere neglected by,
110, 127, 209, 210-11, 215,
216
listening skills and, 121, 144,
153, 228-29
manipulative techniques of,
199-201, 211
news presentation on, 23
passive learning and, 80, 187,
199, 201-3, 230-31
reading skills and, 198-99, 203,
208-9, 221, 222-34
right hemisphere stimulated by,
210-11, 215, 216
as scapegoat, 44, 87
simple syntax used on, 117, 121
socioeconomics of, 196, 238,
252, 321
viewing time of, 18, 23, 94,
169, 196, 216-17
visualization skills and, 232,
316, 342
writing skills and, 202
see also Sesame Street
Television and America's Children:
A Crisis of Neglect
(Palmer), 320
tense markers, 108
teratogens, 59
tests, 28d
California Achievement, 28
dumbing-down of, 27-29
faulty, 26-29, 36
Graduate Record Examinations,
see Graduate Record Examinations
IQ, see IQ tests and scores
manipulating scores of, 29. 36,
268, 269-71, 273, 278
Presidential Fitness, 168
of reading skills, 26-36
Scholastic Aptitude, see Scholastic
Aptitude Test
Stanford Achievement, 28
textbooks, 36-37, 116
thalidomide, 58
Tharp, Roland G., 305-6
therapy:
cognitive, 156
physical, 171
thinking:
connective, 312
critical, 124, 125, 133, 251,
257-59, 303-4, 305-6, 309,
317, 319-20
holistic, 124, 125, 133, 257-59,
340
language and, 97-99
metacognition and, 313-15
mindware and, 311
nonverbal, 107, 250, 341-42
relational, 124, 125, 133, 251,
257-59, 303-4, 305-6
syntax and, 105-7, 110
teaching of, 308-18
in writing, 110-12
Third World, 321
Thought and Language (Vygotsky),
183
time sequence, 108
toast, 167
Tom Sawyer (Twain), 116
toxic exposure, 58, 59-61, 62,
138, 162, 163, 164-65, 238
"Trackton, " 255
trade books, 298
transfer, 205-6, 208, 327
Twain, Mark, 121-22
Twice as Less (Orr), 113
twins, 50
two-tier society, 335

underclass, 244, 246, 335
United States:
educational philosophy of Japan
vs., 280-81
low performance levels in, 16, 39

"Vacuous Vision, The" (Emery
and Emery), 203
Vail, Priscilla, 102, 103-4, 109,
295, 338
Valenti, Jack, 36
Venezuela, 26'Z
verbal skills:
brain functions required for, 20,
40
decline of, 13-15, 21, 99-102
GRE scores declining in, 19
IQ test scores declining in, 37-
38
SAT scores declining in, 17-18
vertical feature detectors, 75
video games, 195-217
addictiveness of, 205
attention spans and, 154
emotional lures of, 207
limited educational potential of,
207-8
real-life situations substituted
by, 80-81, 87
right hemisphere and, 125, 127
transfer and, 205-6, 208
videos, music, 196, 340
visualization, 109, 232, 316, 342
visual literacy, 320, 321, 339-40
visual system of brain:
feature detectors of, 75, 76
hearing impairment and, 130
vitamin pills, 167
Vivaldi, Antonio, 174
Vygotsky, Lev, 183-84, 185, 186

Waber, Deborah, 258-59, 261
wait time, 293
Wall Street Journal, 16
Wang, Margaret C., 139
Washington Post, 25
Wechsler Scales, 38
Weikart, Phyllis, 171
Wells, Gordon, 90, 92, 96, 246
Welsh, Marilyn, 190
When Children Don't Learn
(McGuinness), 156
White, Burton, 285-86
White, Mary Alice, 338
whites, blacks adopted by, 263
whole language movement, 296-
304
active learning and, 297-300
integrating skills in, 297, 300-
302
misuses of, 303
source materials in, 297, 302
Wiggins, Grant, 311
wild children, 129-30
Wilson, Marilyn, 309
Winn, Marie, 196, 210
Witelson, Sandra, 133
Within Our Reach (Schorr), 247,
265
Woodward, Arthur, 36
wordcalling, 26
words:
closed class (function), 118-19,
126, 129, 132
open class (content), 115-19
separating pictures from, 91-92,
133, 144
Wordsworth, William, 85
working memory, 231
working mothers, 43, 94, 95, 240
writing:
brain and, 211-12, 214, 215-16,
261, 342-45
clear thinking in, 110-12
computers and, 325-26
declining skills in, 110-12
habits of, 68
integrating other language skills
with, 297, 300-302
as intellectual stimulation, 119,
290, 295
invention of, 87, 342
television and, 202
Writing to Learn Mathematics
(Countryman), 112
Wurtman, Judith, 166
Wurtman, Richard, 167-68

zero-based curriculum, 273
Zigler, Edward, 241, 273
zinc, 167
zone of proximal development
(ZPD), 186, 190, 191, 326-27
Zukav, Gary, 340-41
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:34 pm

Dr. Diamond continues. "Here's a summary of the data comparing brain size and weight of rats reared in the standard cages, those who lived in the 'impoverished' environments, and here" -- she pauses dramatically -- "are the results with the animals who lived in the enrichment cages. Notice how, with increasing amounts of environmental enrichment, we see brains that are larger and heavier, with increased dendritic branching. That means those nerve cells can communicate better with each other. With the enriched environments we also get more support cells because the nerve cells are getting bigger. Not only that, but the junction between the cells -- the synapse -- also increases its dimensions. These are highly significant effects of differential experience. It certainly shows how dynamic the nervous system is and how responsive it is to its internal and external surroundings."
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:34 pm

Another point: Has no one noticed that children are very culturally literate -- except that it's for a different culture? Just make up a list of any details from Roseanne, Family Ties, Sesame Street, etc. and most kids would come out looking as smart as they really are. The problem is that our children have exposed us to ourselves, and we don't like what we see. We have shown them what is really valued in our society, and those little cultural apprentices have happily soaked it up.

If we are serious about wanting them prepared by a knowledge base to gather the intellectual fruits of world cultures, the obvious expedient is to change the content of children's television programming and use other video as enrichment. In my opinion, this should be a major responsibility of both educational and commercial networks. Otherwise, we will soon be forced to revise university-level curricula to include in-depth studies of talking animals and human buffoons.

Schools cannot plaster children with a paste of "cultural literacy" that the culture itself repudiates. Nor can schools completely counteract the powerful effects of television programming that works at direct cross-purposes with our efforts to teach children to think.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Endangered Minds: Why Children Don't Think, And What We

Postby admin » Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:36 pm

While dining not long ago with a scientist who probes the workings of the brain, I enjoyed hearing about the intellectual exploits of his three-year-old daughter, clearly the apple of her Daddy's eye. I enjoyed his stories, that is, until we got to dinosaurs.

"She can recognize all the names when she sees them on the computer screen: Tyrannosaurus Rex, Brontosaurus, whatever -- and she matches them right up to the pictures'" he said happily. "The program we got her even teaches about what each one ate, and whether they could fly, and all kinds of stuff. It's amazing!"

I didn't say what was really on my mind at that point . . . something like, "I'm sure that will be really useful for her when she takes her first course in paleontology." Being something of a wimp in the presence of those who spend their days rooting around in other people's brains, I only said,

"And how long did it take her to learn all this?"

"Oh, she loves her computer. She spends a lot of time at it. When my wife and I are busy we would much rather see her there than watching TV. At least we know she's doing something educational."

"Does your little girl ever just play -- by herself, or with other little kids?"

"Oh, sure." He thought for a moment. "But she really loves that computer! Isn't it wonderful how much they can learn at this age?"

"What do you think that computer is doing to her brain?" I asked.

He paused. "You know," he said slowly, "I never thought about it. I really haven't a clue."
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Previous

Return to A Growing Corpus of Analytical Materials

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests